The URL can be used to link to this page

PL 06/08/1983 - 6816PLANNIN6 COMMISSION MEETING City of fridley A G E N D A WEDNESDAY, JUNE 8, 1983 CALL TO ORDER: ROLL CALL: APPROVE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: MAY 18, 1983 1. VACATION REQUEST: SAU #83-01, PETITION N0. 4-83, Uacate the Easterly 130.70 feet of 54th Avenue between Blocks 12 and 13, Hamilton's Addition to Mechanicsville> by the owners of 5380 and 5400 4th Street N.E. 2 3. : L.S. #83-02 Split off Lot 12, and the Westerly 3❑ teet ot Lot 13, Block 1, City View, to make a new building site, the same being 241 57th Place N.E. 4. RECEIVE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MINUTES: MAY 10, 1983 5. )EVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MIN 7:30 P.M. ' PAGES 1 - 11 12-16 17 - 20 21 - 32 PINK WHITE 6. RECEIVE PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINISTES: MAY 16> 1983 7. RECEIVE ENVTRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMISSION MINUTES: MAY 17, 1983 8. RECEIVE APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES: MAY 24, 1983 3 items go to Council 9. RECEIVE ENERGY COMMISSION MINUTES: MAY 25, 1983 10. OTHER BUSINE55: ADJOURNMENT: 6REEN BLUE YELLOI� ORCHID CITY Of FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 18. 1983 CALL TO ORDER: Chairwanan Schnabel called the May 16. 1983, Planning Comnission meeting to order at 7:3A p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Ms. Schnabel. Mr. Oquist, Ms. Gabel, Mr. Saba, Mr. Kondrick, Mr. Nielson (for Mr. SvandaJ Members Absent: Brian Goodspeed Otfiers Present: Bill Deblon, Associate Planner L, Ro6ert Erickson, B5 - 3rd Ave. S.E., New Brighton Margaret A. Seger, 1401 - 73rd Ave. N.E, See attached list APPROVAL OF 11AY 4 1983 PLANNING L�MFlIS5I0N MLNUTES: MdFSON BY MR. RONDRICK, SECONDED 8Y XFi. OpUZST� TO APPROVE THE MRY 4, I983, PLANNING COMMISSSON MIMJTES AS WRITTEN. i UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTINC AYE, CXAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED TXE 110TZON CARRIED UHANIMOUSLY. l. PUBLIC HEARING: REZONING RE UEST ZOA �83-03 BY L. ROBERT ERICK50N: �zone t e Wes� t Half of ot . an'd aS`I ofTot �TanaT, ucia ane Addition, from R-1 (single family dwelling areasf to R-3 (general multiple family dwe7lings) to allow the construction of a 14�unit condominium project, the same being 1133-1145 Mississippi Street N.E. MOTZON BY NR. SABA, SECONDED BY MS. GABEL, TO OPEN TNE PUBLIC t1ERRING ON ZQA N83-03 BY L. ROBERT ERICKSON, UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOT,TNG AYE, CXAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:36 P.A1. Mr, Deblon stated the property is located on the corner of Mississippi St. and TH 65, west of Lucia Lane. The proposal is for a rezoning from R-1 to R-3. and would consist of a condominium development where the occupants form an association and own the land jointly. The proposal is for three twin homes : co+nbined with an eight-unit carria9e-manor type hane. Mr. Deblon stated the project has been moved over to the west away from Lucia lane with access onto Mississippi because of the developer's sensitivity to the existing single family residences. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING� MAY 18, 1983 PAGE 2 Ms. Gabel asked if the project met a)1 the setback requirements. Mr, Debl�n stated a variance fran 35 feet to 25 feet would be needed on the north property line. Mr. Deblon stated the p7an meets all the parking requirements, and there is the potential to make visitor parking. Mr. Deblon stated that condominiums can be dissolved and the properties sold individually in the future, so 5taff fiad to take into consideration the possi- bility of the properties 6eing split witfiout further variances. With the new zero lot line subdivision regulation,some of tfie double bungalow units could go zero lot line as a twin home. This fias been allowed in Fridley in the past. This p]an does meet most of tf�e requirements for a possible subdivision in the future. Mr, Deblon made the following additiona7 cortments on the proposal. 1. A variance is required fran 35' to 25' on the north property line. 2. Fencing and iandscaping is required for district separation. 3. Drainage plan is required (Rice Creek Watershed District has to approve this drainage plan), 4. Concrete curbing and blacktop per standard code requirements 5. Will need an additional 20 foot easement for bikeway/walkway ,roadway. 6. Engineering Department fias a concern about the location of the access onto Mississippi St. in relationship to the access onto Highway 65. The distance is only 160 feet. With the County's plans for widening Mississippi for a right turn lane and the number of cars already existing on Mississippi, Engineering �•res very concerned that there could be congestion and sane problems. Mr. Deblon stated there are sane rather deep lots north of this property. He did not know if any of the owners of these lots had any plans for subdivis'�r�, He stated there is enough square footage to divide, but they would not be very optimum lots because of the traffic on Highway 65; however, the City has to consider any future access to these lots. It was a 3udgement call that might have to be determined as to whether these lots wauld ever be split. Ms. Schnabel asked where the garages were located and which way the buildings would face. The petitioner, Mr, Erickson stated the garages were located in the inner court. The rear elevation and backyards will face Lucia Lane. The rear elevation will have a deck and patio door on the upper leveT one-half flight up, Ms. Schnabel asked if Mr. Erickson had built any of these types of dwellings in the metropolitan area. Mr. Erickson stated he has built in Coon Rapids, Eden Prairie, New Hape, and Brooklyn Park. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MAY 18 1983 PAGE 3 Ms, Schnabel asked that of the buildings he has built,were any of them rental units? Mr. Erickson stated that since 1980, he has built only owner-occupied. All these units will be owner-occupied and wil7 be FHA/VA approved. Ms. Schnabel asked the approximate price of the units, Mr. Erickson stated the twin homes will run in the mid-60's with the double bungalows being just under that. Ms. Schnabel asked what type of screening Mr. Erickson would use between this property and the R-1 properties. Mr, Erickson stated he was thinking of wooden fencing; however, because the lot is so heavily wooded, it was hard to decide what to do for landscaping. He stated he would save every tree he could. Mr, Saba asked why the rear of the double bungalows would face Lucia Lane. Mr. Erickson stated there were two reasons for this: (1) He wanted to keep the project centralized so everyone could use the same road for snow plowing and other maintenance; and (2} the biggest complaint from the neighborhood seemed to be to not put any more traffic on Lucia Lane. By facing the buildings in, this kept the traffic off Lucia Lane. Ms. Schnabel stated she was a little bit concerned about the plainness of the rear of the buildings facing Lucia Lane when all the rest of the hanes on Lucia Lane are facing front. It seemed inconsistent with the n8ighborhood, yet she understood what Mr, Erickson was saying in terms of traffic. Mr, Erickson stated this is not inconsistent in condo developments. A number of condo developments are done tfiis way. Mr, Saba asked Mr. Erickson if he would consider turning the buildings around to face Lucia Lane. Mr. Erickson stated he would consider turning the buildings around; however, because of the heavily wooded area, he did not think the buildings could be seen that well fran Lucia Lane anyway. If the buildings were turned around, a lot of trees would be lost because of the driveways. Ms. Schnabel asked for questions and concerns fran the people in the audience. Mr. Russe7l Burris, 1150 Mississippi St., stated he would like to submit to the Planning Commission a copy of his objections. He reviewed it for the Comnission: 1. Spot zoning, 2. Traffic congestion - exit on Mississippi St, would be hazardous. 3, Good or poor construction and cost per unit rental or homeowner, 4. Sewer problems - Burris and Lane are on dead end sewer line. City has to backflush this from time to time to keep sewer line open. A separate sewer line to Lucia Lane is a must for which the homeowners would be assessed on their yaxes. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETIN6 MAY 18 1983 PAGE 4 5. What wouid prevent an investor from buying a unit and renting it out? 6. Garbage pickup - where would cans be placed? 7. 14 units probab7y would mean up to 28 cars. How many children? 8. Back of condo faces Lucia Lane which would not enhance the neighborhood. That would also mean children pTaying in backyard and running out on Lucia Lane. Mr. Burris stated that a few years back, the City of fridtey hired a reputable zoning company, and paid good money for them to rezone Fridley. Said company conformed the original findings of R-7 and recommended this property remain R-1. Mr, Burris stated it has been the concensus of the homeowners surrounding this property that three nice residential homes could be built on the property. This would then solve the problem once and for alt. The homeowners would like to see this area deve)oped as it should. according to the regulations and requirements of the zoning comnission. Ms. Schnabel read the following letter from �une Johnson, 6600 lucia Lane: "Inasmuch as I cannot attend your meeting tonight with reference to the property on Mississippi and Highway 65, I would like to express my thoughts on the matter. Lucia Lane has been zoned for single family homes for many years with the exception of the apartments on the north end of the Lane. I do not feel it to be proper to have a multiple dwelling of the size j proposed for the corner property. I feel there would be too much disrup- tion of traffic because of the entryway on Mississippi. Traffic going in either direction will be hampered by the cars going into or out of the lot. I purchased this home with the belief that this would remain a single family area, and I wou]d ]ike to have it remain so so that my property values will not he affected. We have a lot of extra traffic from the apartments and the Knights of CoTumbus Hatl at the north end." Mr, Clarence Timo, 6517 Lucia Lane, presented a written petition for denial and objection to the rezoning request. He stated his objections were essentially the same as those expressed by Mr. Burris. 7. Spot rezoning 2, Traffic problems pnd hazards a. Traffic from KC Hall and apartments to the north already cause congestion. b. Highway 65 and Mississippi St. intersection already has a history of many serious (and sane fatal) accidents. c. ihe driveway area within the complex would be like a huge parking lot, with possibly not enough room to safely accomnodate up to 28 vehicles. Traffic movement within the area would pose dangers to residents and sma71 chfldren. d. Heavy traffic flow on all three sides of the proposed site would definitely pose a safety hazard to children whose play areas woutd be adjacent to the traffic. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MAY 78 1983 PAGE 5 3. Uepreciation of home va7ues a. Loss of beautiful trees b. Duplexes and multiple dwellings are not as carefully maintained in general as sin9le family homes. 4. Burden on homeowners a. Sewer and water mains are not equipped to handle such a large increase in popu7ation in such a small area. A sewer back-up prob7em already exists. 5. Increased density would not be consistent with urban and city planning which is designed to protect the quality of residential life. 6. Residents bought homes with the knowledge this pr�perty was zoned R-1, and they want the area to remain R-1. Ms. Bystram, 6533 Lucia Lane, stated her concern was with off-street parking. Besides the 14 units with possibly two cars for each unit, there are also going to be guests, Sometimes it is easier to park on the street, and the only place to park would be on Lucia Lane. With the apartments north on Lucia, there is ample parking, but still there are cars parking on the street. That had to be stopped with "no parking" signs in front of the hanes. Ms. Schnabel asked if there was guest parking within the interior of the development. Mr. Deblon stated that according to the first draft plan, there is �o guest parking, but sane areas have been discussed for guest parking. Ms. Irene Naedtke, 6540 Lucia Lane, stated she would be very unhappy if she was "boxed" in by this development. There are beautiful trees on this lot, and in looking at the drawing of the development, she knew there would not be one oak tree left on that lot. Single family homes would be fine, because some of the trees could be saved, for ecology reasons, she did not think the development was feasible. Mr. Eugene Lane, 1132 Mississippi St., stated he has lived in Fridley for 32 years. In the morning between the hours of 6:00 and 9:00 and between 4:00 and 7:00 in the afternoon, the intersection at Mississippi and Highway 65 is very busy. It is not feasible to put that much additional new traffic onto Mississippi. Mr. Henry Melcher, 6500 Pierce St., stated he would like to reinforce what the residents have already said, At 7:00 a.m, he has trouble making a left hand turn onto Mississippi. At 3:00-5:00 p.m., the cars are backed up past Lucia Lane past his house to get through the Mississippi/Highway 65 intersection. Mr. Timo had talked about the great number of accidents at this intersection, and Mr, Melcher stated this could be reinforced by looking at the police reports. Mr. Melcher stated he and his wife paced th3s area off. and if tfiis development went into this area, there would virtually not be any oak trees ieft on the lot. He stated this is also too high a density to put into tfiis area. PLANNING COhMISSION MEETING, MAY 18, 1983 PA6E 6 Mr, Cory Bystram, 6533 Lucia Lane. stated his house vrould be facing the back end of the two double bungalows. He stated he has been delivering papers for six years, and f�e knows a little about what people leave in their back yards. He did not think they should have to look at these back yards and what might be left there. If there is only one garage for each unit, where are people going to store their lawn mowers, equipment, bicycles, and other things people usually store in a garage? M�, Joe Randall, 1210 Mississippi St., stated his family was involved in an acci- dent at the intersection of Mississippi and Highway 65. He stated he rides the bus and has a difficult time crossing Highway 65 to catch the bus. It is a highly congested area. The oak trees are fantastic. He would like to see this area stay zoned residential as the zoning commission originally said. Ms. Bystram, 6533 Lucia Lane, stated that in hearing the price range of the condo units, there is likely to be a lot of families with small children. She did not see any additional planning for play areas for these children. Mr. Dean Thomas, 6550 Lucia Lane, stated he also agreed with everything that has been said. He would be very unhappy to see this development. It is too many people in too small an area, and they would lose the beautifu] trees. Mr. Darrel Goerdt, 6b10 Lucia Lane, stated earlier in the rt+eeting Mr. Deb]on had mentioned the deep lots and whether any of the owners of these lots would consider subdividing their lots in the future. He stated he bought his lot because it is a deep lot, and he would never consider subdividing it. Mr, Erickson stated that some of the remarks he had heard seem to imply that second class citizens will be going into this development. He disagreed 100%. There will be a haneowners' association which Ras very rigid rules, so there wil] not be any trashy back yards. The maintenance is all hired out and none of the owners have any responsibility for the upkeep. Ms. Gabel stated she agreed with Mr, Erickson. It has been her experience that haneowners' assaiations do a very good job in maintaining a condo project. She also agreed with the cortment that with the price range, these units will probably be first family hanes and starter homes, and there probably would be a iot of chi]dren. She thouyfit the idea of a play area should 6e considered in the project. Mr. Erickson stated he would be paying a large park fee and he felt that was adequate. He thought the bulk of the buyers will be empty nesters, retired people. This is based on the flow of buyers that are turning up in the different condo projects around the metropolitan area--Apple Valley, Eden Prairie, North Daks, Coon Rapids. Ms. Joyce Swartson, 6601 Lucia Larte, stated this was all pure speculation, and they really do not know wFio will move into these units. This is an R-1 zoning, and there wi11 be a density prablem, traffic pro6lems, and sewer and water problems. There will be no oak trees. There will be cfiildren. There will he parking on Lucia Lane, and people will be watking through back yards. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 18, 1983 PAGE 7 Ms. Bystram stated that at this point, she thought they had to be realistic and maybe there needs to be sane kind of balance. If tfiis property was rezoned to R-3, was there any possibility of the developer reducing the n�nber of units? She would like to see this as an option. Ms. Schnabel asked Mr. Erickson if he yould consider reducing the number of units. Mr. Erickson stated he rrould not. MOTZON 8Y MS. GABEL, SbLONDED BY XR. SABA� Tp CI�OSE THE PUBLSC XEARING ON ZOA k83-03 BY L. ROBERT ERICKSON. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWpMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED TXE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 9:20 P.M. Mr. Saba stated that one of the main objections expressed by the citizens was the sewer problem. Was there really a sewer problem? Mr. Deblon stated that was a question that would have to be answered by the Engineering Department. Engineering had not expressed any concern reqarding this proposal. Routine maintenance is 6eing done continually on the sewer system, He stated he would check the record to see if there would be a problem as far as capacity and get this information back to the Planning Comnission or the City Council. � Ms, Schnabel stated the sewer problem should definitely be checked with Engineering, Also, no matter what development eventually goes on this lot, something else that should be checked with Engineering is wfiat the County's intention is in terms of a right turn lane. Ms. Gabel stated she had to speak against the rezoning. She felt it was a spot rezoning. The zoning is inconsistent with the neighborhood and the planning done over the years. She was also concerned with the sewer� and they needed more information about it. The traffic problems are obvious, but the biggest problem she had with it was the spot rezoning. Mr. Oquist stated he agreed with Ms. Gabel. It was spot rezoning; however, some- thing will 6e done with this property, and F�e did not tfiink anyone would be putting in single family homes. He was also co�cerned about the traffic. Mr. ICondrick stated it would be great to be able to leave that property vacant; however, they have to consider tF�e overall good of the carmunity. Housing is needed in the City. He liked the set-up of the homeowners' association. He also could not imagine anyone wanting to live in a single family home on this corner. He agreed that it was spot rezoning, but his main concern was the traffic, Mr. Saba stated he did not have as many objections with the spot rezoning, because he felt it would never be developed as R-]. He had a problem with the density. He would rather see the double bungaiows facing Lucia Lane, and he would prefer to see two rtare double bungalows instead of the carriage-type hanes. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MAY 18 1983 PA6E S Mr, Oquist stated the other side of the issue is that the City needs to provide what is called "affordable housing", and this is affordable housing. Ms. Schnabel stated she was concerned about the�density. She felt it was more units than she would like to see go into this area. She, too,shared the concern about spot rezoning, 6ut also did not see single family hanes ever going in there. Mr. Saba stated he liked the concept despite the objections. He could see a developnent like this going in there eventually� but with fewer units, Mr, Deblon stated he looked at the positioning of this development as creating a quieter environment for the homes on Lucia Lane. He stated the concerns expressed were very valid, but he thought this was a positive aspect of a develop- ment of this nature. NOTZON BY MR, KONDRICK� SECONDED SY MR. SABA, TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL DENIAL OF REZONZNG REQUEST, ZOA M83-03, BY i, ROBERT ERICXSON� TO REZONE THE WEST HALF OF Ll)T 0� AND ALL OF LOTS 5� 6 AND 7� LUCIA IANE ADDITION, FRA+! R-1 (SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINC AREAS) TO R-3 (GENERAL ?NLTIPLE FAMILY DWELLINGS) TD ALIOW TNE CONST1tUCTION OF A 1Q-UNIT CONDOMINIilM PXOJECT� TXE SAME SEING 1133-2145 MISSISSIPPI STREET N.E. Mr. Oquist stated and putting in a the City CounciT. the sewer issue and the County's p7ans for widening Mississippi right turn lane should be resolved before this item goes to UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTZNG RYE, CNAIRWQMAN SCNNABEL DECIARED THE MOTION CRRRIED UNANIMOUSLY. NOTIOfJ BY MS. GABEL, SECONDED BY NA, SABA, TO RECENE INTO THE RECOHD TXE LETTERS FROM RUSSELL BURRIS AND JUNE JOHNSON AND TXE PETITION FROM CLARENCE TIMO, RND TO FORWARD THESE ON WITH TNE MZNUTES TO CITY CCAINCIL. UPON A VOZCE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCXNABEL DECLARED THE MOTZON CARRZED UNANIMOUSLY, Ms. Schnabel stated that qn ,lune 6. the City Council would set the public hearing for June 2D. 2. , «,. „ , 7650 Lakeside Road N,E. 3-01, MARGARET A. SEGER: 5plit off the southerly 2, 5pring Lake Park Lakeside, the same being iginal Lot - 1586 Osborne Road N.E.) Mr. Deblon stated this was an informal hearing as required by the subdivision ordinance for a lot split. Mr. Deblon stated this lot split was requested back in 1975. The request came before the Planning Commission and the Planning Cormiission recomnended the PLANNING COMDIISSION MEETING MAY 18 1983 PAGE 9 petitioner have the property surveyed and that all utility easements be worked out with NSP. Northwestern Be11, Minnegasco, Cable Television and the City Engineering Dept. before going on to City Council (page 12, Planning Cortmission minutes, June 25. 1975). Mr. Art Seger stated he was representing his mother, Margaret Seger. who had to leave the meeting earlier. Mr. Deblon stated the lot is exceptionally deep, over 208 feet. The new lot would become l04 feet by 100 feet which would more than•exceed the requirements for a buildable lot. He stated Staff had the following concerns: 1. The petitioner get a survey after the decision of the Planning Commission. 2. There is a park fee requirement (applicant is aware of this) 3. There be a bikeway/walkway easement and street easement on the fr�nt lot along Osborne (Fle be7ieved it was a 17' street easement and a 15' bikeway/walkway easement totalling 32 feet.) Mr, Deblon stated this lot split meets all the requirements thus far per the subdivision ordinance. He stated the sewer and water lines will be checked out before the request goes before the City Council. Other than that, Staff did not see any problems with the lot split. MOTION 8Y 1YR. PpUIST� SECONDED BY MR. KONDRICK, TO RECQNMEND TO CZTY CIXINCIL APPROVAL OF LCYI' SPLIT REQUEST, L.W. N83-OS, BY �1ARGARET A. SEGER, TO SPLIT OFF THE SOUTHERLY 104.02 FEET OP L(Yl I, BIACX ?� SPRING IAXE PAItK LAXESIDE, THE SAME BEING 7650 LAKESIDE ROAD N,E. (ORZCZNAL LOT - 2586 OSBORNE ROAD N.E.), WISH THE FOLLOWING STZPULATZONS: 1. STAFF CIARIFY THE AMOUNT OF EASEMENT NEEDED OFF 0.5BQRNE ROAD FOR STREET AND BIKEWAY/WALXWAY. ?. STAFF CHECK 2t� SEE IF ANY EASEFfENTS WERE REQUIRED FROM THE UTZLZTY COMPANZES AND CABLE T[�. 3. STAFF CLARSFY THE SEWER LSNE. 0. TXE APPLZCANT GET A SURVEY OF TXE PROPERTY PRSOR 7� THE CZTY COUNCIL MEETING. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CXAIRWOINAN SCHNABEL DECLARED TNE MOTION CARRZED UNRNZMOUSLY, � Ms. Schnabel stated this item would go to City Council on June 6. 3. REVIEW OF A PROPOSED ORDINANCE ADOPTING A NEW CHAPTER 101 ENTITLED "ANIMAL XOTZQN BY NR, OQUSST, SECONDED HY MR. KONDRICX, TD CONTINUE REVIEW OF TXE ANIMAL ORDINANCE UNTZL TXE NEXT MEETING. UPON A VOICE VOTE, RLL VOTING AYE, CXAIRWOMAN SCXNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. J PLANNIN6 COMMISSION MEETING MAY 18 1983 PA6E 10 MOTION BY MR. SABA� SECONDED BY Mi. XONDRICK� TO RECENE TXE 1NEM0 DATED lfAY 18� 29B3� FROM JIM PHSLLIPS� LEGAL INTERN. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CXAIRWqNAN SCNNABEL DECLARED TXE MOTION C1lRRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. RECEIVE APRIL 27 1983 HOUSIN6 & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES: MOTION BY MR, OpUZST� SECONDED BY XR, SABA� TO RECESVE TXE APRIL 27� 1983� HOUSING S KEDEVELOPMENT AUTNORITY MINUTES. The Corm+ission members agreed they wou7d like Mr, Boardman to come to a future meeting and explain the HRA's financing process and the General �eserve System. UPON R VDICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWOMAN SCNNRBEL DECLARED TXE MOTION CARRIED UNRNIMOUSLY. 5. RECEIVE MAY 5 1983 HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION MINUTES: MOTION BY MR.OpUIST� SECONDED BY MS. GABEL, TO RECENE THE MAY 5� I983� HUMAN RESWRCES COMMISSION MINUTES. UPON R VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRWANAN SCHNABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 6. RECEIVE MAY 10, 1983, APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES: 1JOTION BY MS. GABEL� SECONDED BY M2. XONDRZCK, TO RECENE TXE MAY I0� Z983, APPEA LS LYkIMISSZON MINUTES, UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTZNG AYE, CHAIRWOMAN SCHNABEL DECLARED TXE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, ADJOURNMENT: . MOTION BY M12, IfONDRICK, SECONDED BY MR. SABA, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. UPON A VOZCE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRWANRN SCXNABEL DECLARED THE MAY 1B, 1983, PLANNING COMMZSSION MEETING AA70URNED AT 10:20 P.M. Respectfully subm' ted, �iL'ac.L �^Tn._� ynne aba Recor ng Secretary ��.� � �,��.�.�-� ��`� ��,�� 7� � iP iy�3 �� ' �`� �. , � � ,��..�-�,�- �� ,, • / � �� .�.-" � ' ��.-„" i�,�¢ � _ �� ti� � �� .� ��. ��'� �� a,��f� , � � ,-� � ��- _w-�i �I� �- <<��-� �/�� ..�.�� ' �/' �' ��.-�� i�-r�/,:� .�t�.v� . ��«,,�' /�'�=-�/.�. �;_��_�_._ �1..��....- �� J %��7 �� ,��'�..�. � -- ��'. ��o - �'��t. ��'�' � � �.u.�� Lt � f: 6 ��, C� �v.. � � �, / !,S' p G�1'L.�.Q-�t . �� .�� . � Sl 7 � ��, .r �,� if/E rl - -�_ /. �� o / - >� � /'�' � �� -t,�--�- 7�. � 6 sso �,U-� ��'�t.� � �id �� -,—� � �' _ � �"�6 ,,�u� J�- � �� , � � Z / G C. �,1 �= �.�_'J, � / rfG / �� `cr.-r �( � / , � So � � Z ; �. ,t.,c ��. ,f� ��,oz� � �,,. }l Ttli'.�f'��/ ��:� , P� /�� x 32 z.6 / �, G 533 1.�.i..F.�. � (�533 L �'�iG ln � ,,�� s�._ � fr� �i/�� r'� �_ ��. CITY OF FRIDLEY PETITIUN (;OVER SHEET Petiiion No. 4-83 Date Received May 31, 1983 iz oejecc Petition to vacate the Easterly 130.70 feet of 54th Avenue between �12 and 13, Hamilton's Addition to Mechanicsville Peti[ion Checked By Percent Signing Referred to Cicy Council Diaposition Date �1 SAV #83-01 13 Street ��/* I�e�u.pF•, `��a1� Ne, the undersigned, petition the City of Fridley to vacate the a�ir� easement A vt ��+,j N' fJd� f�r� w��e � in Block , ��n5 n 3 Addition. Me understand if we have the support of 100% of the property owners in this block, the City rrill waive the �i 50.00 regular fee of St�PS.� Name �� . ��ti�� h'I ��- ��..<<,� _ ��-v-�� Address J�-- f, �� `�� '��- syr �, ��. ��, � �� ' . t 1�� y�+?' � � • CITY OF FRIDL�Y� X APPROYED ` CiIY t7i11�tCI�: ' , ;I►PPRO PARIC FEE REQUIRfD• STIPULATIONS: , �, '�� Ra :,�i ' �....�� 16 AGTION rrox Ej � 0�lDINANCE �l0 ' ?UBIISNED ' .,, `, ,/+.f f1, �t ° �� a�. � �..:.�..� �,, °� �.,��_ DISAPPl�OYED WTf N0. 1ST REM YND READ DISAPPI�YED �IITE MU unirrr varn r✓,P£�vr'�r �i�f�7E,ta,wd fEE W�� RECEIP7 14 STREET LOCATION OF PRpPERTY � U �JT" 37 �/t' LE6AL DESCRIPTION OF PRAPER�If / ft 2 of` 2 13 PRESENT ZONIN6 CLASSIFIGITION�EXISTIN6 U5E OF PAOPERTY ' /ts� d+..i ACREA6E OF Pt�PERTY ^'��D� DESCRIBE BRIEFLY THE PROPOSED ZONIN6 CLA55IfICATION OR TYPE OF USE AND IMPROYEMENT Pt�POSED �Bf,riTio� p� Sf�-tt_7�" ��Gv�b,� Has ihe present applicant previously sought to rezone, plat. obtain a lot splity r variance or speciat use perei,i on the subject site or part of it? __yes ./ no. lihat was requested and when? ` The undersigned understands that: �a) A list of all residents and owners of proper- ti�9)�ant befattacul�d ia'this dppllLatioo.aP(b) This�application� � beesignedat by ai7 owne►s cf the properLy, or m e�planatSon �iven wby this is not the case. (c) Responsibitity fo� ar�y elefect in the proceedings resulting from the faiture to - list the naaies and addrrsss of a]1 residents and praperty owenrs of propRrty in questi�. Lelongs to Lhe undersigntd. �;:;h : 11�icb of proposed property and �ir�ucture �oust be drawn and attached, showing the f�At�p1�t`#�g: �, North directfon. Y, 'Locatfon of the proposed strucLure on the 1ot. �3. ��nensiais �f properRy. proposed structure, and frai and side setbacks. 4. Street �, ,��'i, �ocation and ust �f aQjacent existing �tildinys (wiibia,350 feet). The undersi¢�ed hereby �eciams that a71 the facts and respresentaYions stated in Lhis application are tr� and torrect�� ' � . DATE a�� 15i93 � SI6NATURE /� �'�Qo 4/ .$,�` �� 1e .x+vj3`f:Zl �.?-Q 33 2 �/ e�nrec ,�'.v w�, _.� t�. �/�i S' �TELEPHONE NO cf72 9 3 z�'�/� I I � , , . �.� �`\ ': i ' ;� � . + + . `:• � , _ , r '�- .� �+ e \ . I � � ,� , m � 1� 'S?16 15 u : � '- ts �' s�� ?�� -' ` i , . , . u �� s ' � ♦ , er : . s � �, , ` � � '. W ,. . • -. � .� �r �—'--- ,r►----- T , � � .. ..�3 � I .� 1! � I •� �� / . y , Z � ' � . .' y � _�—_ -•i -�--r._.�`�� ! ! ! � � • ! : , ? ! . , � . ' .'�M1.. . - _��- �•, � ' � ' ` ' ' ' _�_1 „ .. � .\ � , �'_ "' j _ _' t .� � +�� _ i '' - - ' , . � . �_,�� - '�_ � _ �I � � -y . . , ; r S,4V ..$83-01 PETI�"ION iJO. ; ��_ j_ ��-"-*---d`�-- � ` ` • � -4 83; • ., t • ; . .r � �� __ - - I - - '- '' . - 1 ',� : wL �� %xr s M+ �ii�[�,� :,r.�r � � � r�'ji. �.r =_ �►N ��Z_ .u+NS �w�O.� I'I `., . . . . .. �. . • 1, K � , � ' .r.0 �cb .v� j T!r' . � �r i t i. . I • ;' a n ' � 5 c5 - ; � 4 , � � � � _ �ZS r a z;� '' � si �,� i �, , � 'I ; � } u � � i� � , i , Y�, i I � �, ''� ,.� � : .. - - Q . 3 �" ��' z- _ -- ;- . . � F . _ _ �r..� , -� � . w±'� N �_,MM� Y � + :: : ZW . � � ~Z � ' �� Q � �� F.- b Vf „ 5;11 -•.. ��fi <h � : � , N E�'i ;�m �� s .N.� r u � . ii u _ s . � � �� s4� � � . ��• � �� r�� s� . � S�pS s 3i r � �� - � js lf� � � _ � r' s� ' s3�o- 'p n . l �0 J .«... .r�. e � � � �n nn ,� v�ca�� I!� � � � 11q�5� Ig:3;� � !�;•:"•!e �� !�,, ,3--¢* f,_it.: - �:(�;�€� 4Be3._" �w� N � � O, W 0 �� • {� r i� � f .�. f ��; a: _ - „� _� '_r k '� . ', u w�v�r � ' ' ' y• �•�`3 .�.�� ,�. � ,; .,.��e . SAV #83-01, PETITION NO.I4-83 16 1 , � 4 �^/ . a i : � \.\ � � �:__. _�. � � .___—_' _ --iirti� aV+uM�]IO9F 1MS� M/Yt3diS.� �;?;' , . , � : � % _, r�- : ��: � 1 { nl �., � l� � ii�, �.I'- :�. - , Ii ' � � ' /�, r ,, « . t .. = o � _ �'ru . : o '%. : , '�+ _ � .,, � ' .; ` �� °- . 3 �; �..... _�__--��t. � . �-a-� � � � n I} j :� ? �.� � • .� 'o`Y- � � I i I��V.i. .. .i_' �� 1 .._ _�--.-� 4 ! � I . . .� it �1oa^w�" M �0� � N W � � V � , y � � J � r�' 1:F y.� � � •9 V .O '• ��ydt� '. A � t - f .1. � �•a � � YI�. � . _ I � . �i Y' � ' .� I � � • � ��~� • , W � � I - . f O \ - ry .�i { D ' , I T x j . , �� : �� j Q W . : ' ;::_ ? � � . I ? y, : � " � c : ..-.. =.. I � _`'�'� • • y - .� '�._' ..+'•a,�a u1.' ,Q7 �.^�� ' , .' ' �, . - . _ •..,.-- iiN ......... . j . ..e .i i ........ . 'I�• - . . , << ..,,. .. . _.. L � ... ��7i• . y..� `�:...•., .. - �.. . � �C �;�j�0.1 � ,y`o. .. . .�.�.�;.-...� I� II �.� _ � �... _ . 4� .. : u; I� ��o�� :,:.:,: �C .� ... . . . �, �, __ � ....� , .,. , I - _ , . IC �� ,�'� , . . S . .... �'� r . _ h� - ` . I ,/� �� , . � .,�_.. . -�.J _ --- . - � . . . iaisy3niwn �� OM �� AM9M IMYl 31�1f � t� � - _._._ �'�_-.__�_._.� .-'-7�— t_� .. �, + � ;,_. : '�� f � ��4i'- _ •�n .�•-. {,�_. • �' '� . P+ � ' , � ,� `�Y. t � i �' (i - . � \r: , : . ° ` • , - •; ~.�� ' �. S . \ i `�. 5' .�i. ^ �.�.�. . � e r Yoi ° . �; i ` ,-� r "i,� �s" ��- �'y.i t ,... j,., .. � �-a. a. � 1+} i .�\1� ` .�F -i. - i ��''`, x �_a� t � i �� i ] � � 1 � � �� -r' � `�-.�i.%r.�. .. � y-. � `u�1 N�r ' � �:.;�,-� i :'' �.<<'. � �L'\ __1'•�_. 't �; .h9 _ v _ .... .- !s l 1 w c e n n n n� �•• r,� .� n�� q�f �� .� d q n O r e n o o n�• n �. P �• P �• n�� . P n P n P w P 1� ,• �• •••••,.. . � , � w • CITY Oi FAIOLE�►. �wa+ urwvawsnv wv� wi. , swKx.�r. ww. as�as s+s�,sr+-a+�o SUdJECT �OT SPIIT RECGRDED: 17 �s r_ _� 3- o �- �ocrt�ss: a �I ��C J°.�-�� or►r�: ��-+�/�3 ------- /LANNING COtMI55I0N: IlPPR0YE0 DISAPPROYEO GATE NO C11Y COUNCII: PARK FEE REQUIRED: STIPULATIONS: APPROYED DISAPPROYED DATE N0. AMOUNT iAIO � . FEE��OU RECEIPT N0� PROPERTt ONNER(S) R� �havd r�o,, ; c� P� '� er S c n TELEPHONE NO ��;' /-.� �' �I `_� ADDRESS _�Y,cl�f PROPERTY LOCATIOH ON LEGAL OESCRIPTION OF �'� �,�L� CF �- ^` iTREET L c; i ; i'e Guiri �oveRTr ��L� Y . i .. , .SSy3?_ 7fLEPH9NE HO /` � . .}�Ut�A �3-�� w• :: ��„1� c `.� �/ a„d 15• Ici`> I2 n��cl i3( ty�� t Ic�-� ; . !'-��, << ,:,.� ' Hl� IctS= fi�+FZ� tC be `(;�l,�t, � y,-S« TOTAL AREA OF PROPERTY 2 2 4 O C �'� F c fC PRESENT ZONING � REASON fOR LOT SPLIT jU1JC� � L'�'C�E, �"G �e l i �G� �i-l� �I �"9 [' ��c: �r -� TAe undersigned'hereby deciares that all the facts and representations stated in this application �re true and wrrect. DAiE: 8 �t�_ca /'.�.�h;r,�. MOTICE: A sketch of the property an0 the propo5ed lot split wtth any ezisting struc- tures shown should �ccoapany thSs application. ' (See revei�se side for �dQitional instructionsj j� , 1981 POLICY STATEFIENT OP! PARK FEES ON LAND SUBDIVISION " Date In determining fair market value of public areas for land subdivision for cash payment, as required by Ordinance 63.', the following values will be used: Residential subdivision b1,000.00 per lot Residential lot split � 500.00 per lot Cortmercial/Industrial subdivision or lot splits b 0.015 per sq. ft. This fee is to be paid at the time of final plat or lot split approval. The City Council may defer collection to the time a building permit is requested for individual lots created by such subdivision/lot split. The City retains the option to accept an equivalent amount in cash from the applicant for part or all of the portion required to be dedicated. PARK FEE AGREEMENT The undersigned understands that according to the City Platting Ordinance, the following public park land dedication is required to plat residential, Commercial or industrial zoned property. It is further understood that the public park land dedication or cash payment equivalent is at the discretion of the City. It is agreed that a cash paymertt of � will be paid according to the above stated poliCy for the following subdivision/lot Split. It is agreed that the following land deCication is provided according to the above stated policy for the folloV�ing subdivision/lot split: Dedication: Subdivision/lot split: The undersioned further agrees to notify all future property owners or assigns of the cash payment requirement, if it is to be collected at the time of building permit. DATE OOt34 A/ 1067A SIGNATURE Property Uwner � c—~ 1 � i�� _—� N � o s � --- �S�O_ i c �. . --� ��' � 0 ,' . :� V � L.S. #83-02 Peterson 19 ? � � x �1 �>� x EX�ST/NG x FENCF x _J I 2 � Lh • • � • • • ♦ V v J • � !�; r� �,{ ne V Y J J � \� • • • 20 L.S. #83-02 Peterson �� - - — , �.:� .',.: :.:.'_. ._.�.� � � ,..�y ...'M,� ^ .� , t : :�:.°1�j:0': s :..,�`: .. :.�:. . .:,; � : `� . =•� .�.- , � ,��:�i::.th�� fl.,a��::::: :iiZ`.....�., . � �y � N : _� + 1 A•Y �,�� T.,`fC �� : :�.:� ::::::. .::.:.�=::::' C �:�. .:: � _� u._�.�� -_.- � :,�. �.�.�_�___--�- � ,t¢: - .`�-�"""'•r«e..: ,_�� u.ne.n.. ..c -�.. ` � ! , 4 �' ..: .�ri...-.. • � - �4 i rrj�i ��r�•r. .�r�. .; . • �:::.. a _ � � �_�.� !_"w�:.=. � .�.>.... i �Tw R. a{' ' �- rI (� � ��:�:�.!g' 'i':�t� L i..__ '.�.�.i. �I.S`i' � '�'t`�`�_� 9 � f'S-�: r , _ _ _=�� . � . ;,�. �� L _�_�,t.,,�_,.,_ ,—;.�.R.,.;.ja�: � . _ !n �f. •. 1 " � . � .�. :�•{`� �,� .��:`��:�iii�. ��.�• •�F�-��,��-!� , �.�Y�y� � .:-�.:�3. •�_ `!'1':'*:��.� � . •'t.i�:^S� :� •t � � �rw n. •c i � . �. S •;.�.�-`h : S•:�:.:::•�•E8`�' # .�... t � _.► � '�:�..,;t.-�...;.�; �;�'.'-_�.;,;_t:��`�s -� '�.._ . l�M n �C M _ � � • •�:`. F�[ � `e�` ,iVi.i_�.i o�.�• •. � s ..�. • .... .�i �''. ,.� e t.,.1.1.�_�.1�^ t� i. =.. "'."'.. . y� � i� R. , �; ,.1i .. �`• - 1v.1.1.1�,-l:l. � . .';.A:::::. .. ..... -4 '�..• 7 . ... . 4 _ ..i•i �-Y1•�',1Y s _,.s•1`-•.. . . ...-+ane.w. 7 w n. u. 1: �1.1. �;::�x'.� .:t•:�::•.::; .. :Q::::: �.1:1-1` _.:;+;. •.aso. �r .a � . r,. .. . ..Uf... .� � . i .:�" '� � . �.�� --_ � _ •I •.1- •�`f. .�:i� � .. _... "a�� ' e .n � ..... .. . ..,.- v= ' � `°" . . . � � . . �>- �' q :1x�'' �. �•' : 9 '.w�e� �, . a .. O�:•Z' � �1�: _ �: ' :��. .-. .a�o :i: ti .'�_.r� I A .1�� _ .�• - . . .. .. •��r' � _ , : �y`i' = � : _ -: / �.M�-\. 2 � 1=�� ;` �� T / � F. t. � _ � '.�i' � x ` u�. LE � . ..+, i ` �'..�, r � ` � ! � ° � � \• I \' ��\ • l, \ ��O,pt, �T `+� i � �� • F i _ � J � A '1 2 Z N 2y � � �. � N � � n ~ `( O �w- 'V '4 �a�� ¢-t4;�i p •��ta�� a�I w �a'9�5F¢�1 �e�il3c 26 E, An owrer violates tbe teims of this (i�aptez three (3) times within ore (1) Pecmit year. 2, Any person whose permit is revoked shall, within fifteen (15) days, renwe sudf animal(s) pearanently fran the City or h�manely dispose of the animal(s) cited in the violation as bein9 ownedr kept or harbored by sud� person and no part of the permit fee shall be refunded. In addition, the owner may be liable to court action ia�der this Code, State Statutes and local laws for any of the actions cited above. 3. If a permit is revoked, no new permit may be issued for a petiod of one (1) year fran date the permit is revoked. � � • :+�a r �• . Zhe section of this (�apter requiring a pezmit and tag shall not apply to norr residents of the City who are keeping only cbmestic pets, provided that the animal,s of such owners shall be kept in the City no longer than thirty (30) days and the animals are kept imder restraint. �/¢��7li'�,{�7f�/�Y/Yk�� 7�Y�t/�(A'7'/��1'�il�Y�t/�/�#�fl�i�If�tJ��i¢�/��¢�t�i'i'��I#� �.� - •-� •�,• �: •- 101.09. FF�S �e annual permit fee and of this Code. Neutered or fee as provided in Chapter 101.10. II�OI7PIDII� 1. Generally. expiration date shall be as provided in Chapter 11 spayed animals shall qualify for a reduced permit 11 of this C,ode. A. 7t�e Animal Control Officer shall take up and impound any animals requiring permits oz tags found in the City without the tags; or any animsls which aze in violation of any of the other provisions of this (liapter. Ani.mals shall be im�ounded in an anim3l shelter and wnfined in a h�ane maiuier. Impounded aniimis shall be kept for not less than five (5) days, including Simdays and Holidays, imless reclai�red by their owners. B. If an animal is faund at lacge and the ownet or custodian can be identified, the Mimal Control Officer may proceed against the owner for violation of this (2�apter. C. The Animal Control Officer may enter upon any public or private pranises by Warrant or as othecwise provided b� law when such officer is in reasonable pucsuit of his aa her duties. D. Upon taking and impo�ding any animal as provided in this Chapter, the Animal Control Officer shall imoediately notify the owner, if known, and the City Police Department. The Animal Control Officez and Police Depaiiment shall �intain a record of animals so imFo�ded. 2. Claiming an Impoiu�ded Aniiml. zz A. In the instance of animals for which the owner does not have a r�,;ced permit or tag, the Aniiml Control Offioer shall not return such ani�l to the o�wner imtil a peLmit and tag have been purchased from the City or fran the Animal Control Offioer. Zi�e Anim31 Control Officer shall renit to the City the sum paid for the permit and/or tag �,�{ �f¢ �bPf¢y` ?'� l� 1�� 1`1�� 7�1�R`��,i ��X �� R�Pfk4'i�l�d�` � and furnish the City with all necessary infocmation pertaining to said purchase including a cop� of any permit oertifi�ate issued in oonnection therewith. B. Rhe Anim�+l Control Officer shall be paid by the animal's owner an im�oiu�ding fee �Xl� �R� l�� F�� 1` f��}S F��If 1r}S� �� ` 1��A�Z �$ �(��( ,iy( }�E �lyf�. Rt�e Ani�rel Control Offioer shall turn over to the City any impoimdin9 fees ceceived. The City shall place such fees in the general fund of the City. C. If a rabies vaccination is required and ti�e o�wner cannot produoe Fxoof that the animal has had a rabies vaccination within the preceding two (2) yeazs, the Animal Control Officer shall vacci.nate surh dog or other animal for rabies as a condition of release to the owner. The animal's owner shall pay to the Aninal Control Offioer the wst of the immmization. D. ZYie Animal Co�trol Offioer shall be paid by the animal's owner the cost of feed and care for each day the animal is confined in the ��yfd animal a_holteZ. 3. [ficlaimed Zmpo�ded Anim�ls. Any animal which is not claimed within five (5) days after having been „ impoimded, including Simdays oc Holidays, may be cequested and claimed by a licensed educational or scientific institution under Minnesota Statutes Section 35.71. If not so requested and claimed, the animal may be sold for not less than the amount of the tot�l chazges accrued against the animal in acoordance with the provisions of this Chapter. All sums received by the An'v�al Control Offieer, e�cP�t the cost of feed a*x1 �e a*?� ��v vaccinations or imn�n;�at' a;nic ced to t+P �'m��, shall be canitted to the City and placed into the general ftmd of ti�e City. Any animal which is not claimed by the avr�er, a lioensed edu�tional or scientific institution or sold, shall be painlessly put to death and pzopesly disposed of by the Animal Conttol Offioer. 7l�e time of sale or otl�er disposition of the animal shall be at least 120 hours after notice has been given to the animal's owner by the Anisn3l Control Officez, Zhe provisions of notification to the ownez do not apply when the owner carviot be reasonably ascertained. 101.11. PNIMAI� BI1L r �Rl�7i'II1E l. Any person knaaing of a hia�an being bit by a dog, cat, racoon, skunk or othet species susceptible to rabies shall i�mnediately notify the Animal Contsol Offioer or Police Deparbnent. T�fiesever such an ani�]. has bitten any persan, the owner or custodian of the animal, }i�(¢�yl� �¢¢yf af r :na so notified by the Animal Contzol Officet ot the Police Depaztment, shall iimnediately cause said animal to be quarantined at the City of Fridley contract ►C�fyt�X �)(¢��y�� '++�� G!�� a or at a lioensed veterinary hospital ot kennel foz a peziod of fourteen (14) days aftez such person has been bitten. During the quarantine period, said animal shall be kept under 29 imrediately put to death by the Anim31 Control Offiaer without notice to the owner. 101.15. I�S 1. Licen�e Requiceaent. No pereon shall keep or main�iin a kennel in the City except upon obtaining a kennel license aonsistent with the zoning requirenents of this Code. 2. License Application. Application for a kennel lioense shall be made on forms prwided by the City. Such application shall o�ntain the follaaing infoimation: A. Location, on the prenises, of the kennel. B. Location of structutes fot housing the dogs and/or cats. if the dogs and/or cats are to be kept primarily within the home or other building of the residence of the applicant or of any other person, the application shall so state. C. 4Y�e maxiinan rnm�ber of dogs, cats or any combination thereof, to be kept on the prenises. D. 4i�e distance of any dog runs or housing for dogs from any building structures suitable for him�an habitation, or a public place where food is bought, stored or eaten. Rhis distance shall be a minimun of 200 feet. E. �e prenises for any keeping of dogs shall be fenced and a simple plan showing the location of fencing shall be furnished. The fencing must be of such quality }(¢ �� a�d i� � tt,?t it wil� oontain the dogs and/or cats. F. Method to be used in keeping the prenises in a sanitary cor►dition. G. Method to be used in keeping the dogs and/ot cats quiet. H. An agreenent by the applicant that the prsnises may be inspected by the City at all reasonable times. 4. Issuance of Lioense, The City shall have discretion in determining whether or not to issue a lioense, in making su� detezmination, the City shall take into consideration t2ie adequacy of the housin9, the runs for the animals, the method used for sanitation, the method used to keep the animals quiet, the facilities for containing the animals and with particularity any violations during the pcevious license period. 5. Kesrel License Fee. ZY�e annual license fee and expiration date shall be as prwided in Chapter 11 of this Code. 30 6. Lioense Revocation. If a license is granted and the applicant thezeaftez fails to canply with the stat.ene�ts made in the application or any other conditions reasonahly imposed, or violates any other provisions of this Chapter, the licensee shall be notified by mail azx3 given ten (10) days to r�nedy any defects or defaults. If sudi oorciition is not renedied in ten (10) days, a hearing shall be held after at least ten (10) days mai.led notioe to the licensee, and the licensee and all other interested parties shall be heard. If it shall appeaz that said kennel is not being properly maintained, the City may revoke the kennel license and the keeping of three (3) or more dogs, three (3) or more cats, or any combination of three (3) or more dogs and cats shall be immediately disoontinued. �,[/I1�XlbdfldX/Pbl��t'l Xx/�N�XX/I �/r4�X�r�f►�X/�v�t/�/Xi�#r'�E/1�/r76/6�'/¢�t�K/�/6f/XX¢/f�XXt�4�.! �!//XXXb�6/�`if¢/¢�',b�f��/Y6/14E/K6�1!/i�/�/��f3"�fif/6t/xbME�X�/�6��X�v��i! P,!//8�'r�/�ff�X/r�Y�!////// �l//7�XX�/tN�/��/��'/��/i`6/Id�Y�/b�/8��`fih'fabY�rtk./.�,65�'iY�f/aN,4b'/d�f YNe/##��'. . .. . .. �• ,... - ...,: . �€r�'lI?-,. � � • •• �•,• • • - •a; Appointnent. The City may appoint such person, persons or firm as the City may deem neoessary and advisable as Aninal Control Offioer. Such appointees shall wnrk under the supervision of the Fridley Police Department and shall be responsible for tl�e enfozoenent o£ this Chapter. 2. Duties. Aninel Control Officers are authorized to enforce the provisions of this Qsapter and other related ordinances, Chaptezs and statutes pertaining to animal control, including the issuance of citations. 3. Unlawful Acts. It shall be unlawful foc any unauthorized person to break into an animal shelter, or attenpt to do so, or to take or set free any animal taken by the Aninal Control Officer in the �X�1�(¢� e^forcement of this Chapter, or in at►y way interfere with, hinder or molest such Offioer in the discharge of his or her duty �mder this Chapter. 101.17. (�J�RD DOC� 1. Businesses located within the City and maintaining a guard dog for eecurity purposes shall post notioe at the pntrance to the ptenises warning of the presence of said dog. 2. B�sinesses maintaining a guard dog shall file with the City a release authorizing the polioe or fire de�rtments to shoot said dog in an emergency situation, if necessary, in ordec to allow the polioe oc fice fightess to gain acfiittance to the prenises in the performance of their duties. 101.18. SEES2� EYE DOGS Whel►ever a blind person accanpanied by a"seeing eye" or guide dog presents himself/herself for acoq�ucbdation or servioe on any public oorrveyance vehicle or to any cafe, restaurant, store or other place of business open to the public, it shall be imlawful for the proprietor, manager or operator of such vehicle or place of business to refuse a3nission to the dog or service to the blind person. 101.19. QuJII,TY Tt� ANII�4�i6 Minnesota Statutes 346.20 through 346.34 aze hereby adopted by reference and shall be in full force and effect in the City of Fridley as if set out here in full. 101.20. RELATDON 4D O'ISEtt LAW �e prohibitions contained in this C2�apter shall be in addition to any State or Federal law regarding the same or related subjects. 101.21. PHrII�LTIFS Any violation of this Chapter is a misdgneanoz and is s�ject to all penalties prwided for suc3� violation �dez the prwisions of Chapter 901 of this Code. PASSID AI�ID ADOPPID BY �E CITY �[JNCIL OF g]E CITY OF FRIDLEY �iLS _ I]�.P OF , 1983. WII�LIAM J. 2�E - [+AYOR AT1£�iP: 31- CITY OF FRIDLEY COMhUNITY DEYELOPMENT COMMISSION MEETING MAY 10, 1983 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Oquist called the May 10. 1983� Community Development Comnission meetinq to order at 1:35 p.m. ROLI CAIt: Meribers Present: LeRoy Oquist, Ken Vos. Louis Schmidt Members Absent: A1 Gabe7, Carol Fassett Others Present: Mark Burch, Asst. Public Works Director Kerry Van Fleet, Executive Director, Chamber of Commerce Bill Kirberger, President-Elect, Chamber of Cortmerce APPROVAL OF APRIL 12 1983 COMMUIIITY DEYELOPh1Et�7 COMMISSION MINUTES: MOTTOIJ BY MR. SCNMIDT, SECONDED BY DR, VOS, TO APPROVE THE APRIL 12� 1983� COMMUNITY DEVEIAPMENT CCMA775SIDN NINUTES.AS WRITTEN. UPON A VOZCE VOT£, ALL VOTING AYE� CNAZRPERSON QpUIST DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANINOUSLY. 1. ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON AND VICE-LHAIRPERSON FOR 1983-1984: AOiION BY HR. SCHMIDT� SECONDED BY DR. VOS� TO CONTINUE THE ELECT'ZON OF CHAZRPERSON AND VSCE-CXASRFERSON UNTZL TH£ NEXT MEETING WliEN MORE CqNMISSION MEMBERS COULD BE PRESENT, UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, CHAZRPERSON OQUIST DECIRRED TXE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, 2. MEETING WITH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE: Mr. Oquist stated that every year the comnissions develop a work plan. This year one of the ideas the Community Development Comnission came up with was to meet with members of the Chamber of Commerce and discuss some of the things that were of comnon interest to the two bodies. He stated that at the last Commission meeting, they had listed five things that cou]d be discussed with members of the Chamber of Camierce: COr1hR1NI7Y DEVELOPMENT CONPIISSION MEE7ING MAY 10 1983 PAGE 2 1. A liaison between the Chamber of Commerce and the Comnunity Deve)opment Comnission. 2. The concept of preparing a brochure laying out city zoning require- ments, licensing requirements, sign requirements, etc. 3. The possibility of the City and Lhamber co-sponsoring activities, educational seminars. etc.. to the point where the Chamber of Cortmerce might Want to set up a sub-comnittee which would inc]ude members of the Cortmunity Development Comnission (a cartanunity development camiittee). 4. Establishing a rapport between the City of Frid]ey and the Lhamber of Comnerce. 5. The possibility of establishing a"sounding board" cortmittee to receive complaints fran businesses in the City and ta try to work out solutions to problems between businesses and the City. Mr, Kirberger stated that� as incaning president, one of the things he wanted to establish was a better liaison between the City and the Chamber of Commerce. He felt the liaison was not as good as it should be. Dr, Vos stated that in discussing uses for Community Development Block Grant (CDB6) funds, a coupie of ideas discussed by the Caomission was usinq the monies for loans to smal7 businesses and that small businesses could use the funds for handicapped accessibility. He stated this Commission is a group that is not heavily involved in business, and they are not really sure that these ideas are practical or even if small businesses would be interested in those types of things. The Comnission felt they needed to talk with people who deal with businesses every day and felt the Chamber of Cortmerce was a good source to go to. He stated the items Mr. Oquist had listed are not concrete and are just items to promote discussion. He stated the Cortmission needs to find out how the Chamber feels the Commission could fit into their plans. As a Cortmission, they are always struggling with how they fit into the City's plans. Mr. Kirberger stated that the Chart�er has not yet had their organizational meeting in which they wi13 be establishing their responsibilities, what �a�mittees t6ey will have, the chairpersons, and how they feel about certain aspects of their requirements as a Chamber and what areas they should be tackling and how they can assist the merchants in business and industry. But, knowing that the Crnmiss9on has a desire to work more closely with the Chamber than in the past and knowing that the Chamber also would like ta work more closely with the City, he thought they could develop sanething where they could work together on certain programs and aspects for the betterment of the City itself, the Chamber, its �embers, and the residents of the City. Nr. Oquist stated that regarding Comnunity Development Block Grants. the last two years the Cortmission has tried to cane up with areas where that money can be spent. Two years ago. the Cormnission had a public hearing and invited citizens, businesspeople, merchants. etc., to the meeting. No one showed up who was COhP1UNITV DEYELOPMENT COMMISSION MEETING MAY 10 1983 PAGE 3 interested in the CDBG funds. Three people attended who were interested in transportation for the seniors, and there were three people fran the League of Women Yoters. What the Cartmission really needed was sane input from the cormwnity on what the needs of the community were and how that money could best 6e spent. Mr. Kir6erger stated he felt one of tfie ma3or problem areas is that people do not ynderstand completely what is going on, where t6e money is caning from, why it has to be spe�t, where it could be spent. etc., and that is where the educational seminars could come in. They need to educate the people and then they can get the feedback and input after the people have that understanding. Mr. Oquist stated that maybe by fall they could get sane feedback from the business cortmunity through the Chamber as to where there were some needs for CDBG monies. Mr. Kirberger stated he gets a little frustrated as an individual because they cannot move as fast as they would like to move when they feel there is a certain requirement because of the protocol and procedure that must be followed to get approval of their Board, then it must be presented to the general membership and a vote taken. Sanetimes, it can take up to 60 days to get any concrete information, and that might not be adequate when the Comnission has to make a decision on specific kinds of things like the CDBG monies. Ms. Yan Fleet stated there were a couple of things she was interested in as a Chamber member. One was the brochure idea. She would take pictures of different areas of Fridley and then work up a brochure with the pictures giving information on schaols. the city, businesses. different types of services. It would also be a directory, Mr. Oquist stated that maybe they could include in the brochure the things that new businesses should know about the City--zoning requirements, signing� ordinances, etc. Ms. Van Fleet stated she thought it could be a good selling tool for prospective businesses and new people moving into the area. She stated she gets inquiries every day from people interested in moving into Fridley. She sends aut a lot of information on the city, churches, businesses, and schools. Some of the other things people want to know are the clubs and organizations, population, average cost of hanes, resale values, history of Fridley, and all different types of costs. Ms. Van Fleet stated she thought the only way they could pay for a brochure of this kind would be to use it as a Cham6er directory of services and have the aiembers take out ads. She stated sane cities do the book two ways--they have a book that comes apart so there is just a directory for the Chamber members without all the data and then a thicker book that is used as an advertising tool for the City, Fire Dept., and other clu6s and organizations, St. Cloud just did a book and it has been successful. LOMMJNITY DEVELOPMENT COFMISSION MEETING MAV 10 1983 PAGE 4 Ms. Van Fleet stated she had just received a letter from Brookdale. Brookdale was sending these letters to all the cities around thaL would be serviced by Brookdale, and they are willing to spotlight one city each month in their iaall area. Mr. Kirberger stated the Chamber receives many mailings like this. Whenever mailings are sent out, the logical place to send them is to the Chamber of Comnerces of different cities. The Cham6er is probably going to be getting a lot of information that the Commission might be interested in receivi�g. This is an area where the Chamber can help the Canmission by comnunicating information that might be of interest to the Camnission or by working with the Canmission on things, Ms. Van Fleet stated she has a book containing all the Chamber of Cortunerces in the world. A number of people call her asking for the different Chambers in different cities just for information for vacationing, Quite often she gets long distance calls from other places asking for a business in Fridley, if there has been an address change or a name change. Ms. Van Fleet stated the Chamber of Carunerce is made up of peopie who either work or live in Fridley. They have a number of individuals who belong to the Chamber. There are no rules or regulations on who can or cannot belong. There are individuals who belong to the Chamber that have an interest in wfiat is going on in the City in commerce and industry and, therefore. want to be an independent member. Mr. Kirberger stated that as incoming president, his role this year is to get as many members of the Chamber as possible active on camnittees. The more activity, the more members active on committees, the more the education they are going•to obtain and the stronger they will becane as a Chamber; and they will be able to do things to assist other groups within the City. Mr. Kirberger stated that, for instance, the City might want to pass some kind of requirement on aesthetics that might not be very applicable to industry or commerce and might be creating a greater expense for that corporation or business. What would it be obtaining for the general citizenry? Would it be helping the health and welfare of individual5 or not? If not, then why should a corporation be asked to spend E3.000 to fix something up when, if left the way it was, it is no detriment to either aesthetics or the health and welfare of the comnunityY Mr, Oquist stated that was an interesting point. He stated that the chairperson of each of the commissions sits on the Planning Canmission. As a member of the Pianning Commission, he sees that matter come up frequently when new businesses cane before the Planning Cammission with a special use permit request or something of that nature, and Staff starts discussing what is required--the landscaping, drainage, signage, etc. He agreed with whaY Mr. Kirberger had indicated. Maybe the expense to the business isn't worth what the City is after. Conversely, havever, by better cartnunication and exchange of information. the businesses could better understand where the City is caning fran and why the City requires certain things. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMiIS5I0N MAY 10, 1983 PAGE 5 Mr. Oquist stated another thing suggeste�d by the Commission was the possibiiity of establishing a"sounding board", a sulb-committee that would work with the Cam�ission as wel] as the Chamber in ]istening to canplaints and problems fram businesses. Many of the merchants have been concerned about the Center City Project, how they have been kind of upro�ted and have lost money. These people need sane group through the City that th,ey can cane to to express their concerns. Ms. Van Fleet stated it is really a matt�er of people not knowing what is going on and the frustration of not knowing. She stated the Chamber has been very iucky in that Kent Hili had been caning to their Board meetings once a month and telling them about what was happenirng within the City as far as building and changes. She stated they have reall,� appreciated that information. Mr. Oquist stated that one thing Dr, Vos had meniioned earlier was the possibility of using CDBG monies for loaning money t�o small businesses at a law interest rate. That interest money can come back into tlhe loan organization and be reused again. Dr. Vos stated small towns sometimes put together a caimunity development corpor- ation. People buy shares into that corp�oration and loan it out to starting businesses who in turn pay it back, It is seed money to have some growth in a small town. The Commission thought this would 6e a way of getting a chunk of money to start with. They didn't want t�� be in canpetition with commercial lenders. Mr. Kirberger stated the question he had was how much land is available for cortmercial and industrial development in Fridley? He knew of some land that was zoned heavy industrial. Are they still going to have the carmercial businesses (smalt stores. grocery, hardware, etc.) i:entered in the Center City Project area or are they going to start some satellit�e areas around the City? Mr. Oquist stated the City is always trying to be careful about strip zoning; however, Mr. Kirberger had brought up a i3ood point. The city is about 98-99% developed residential, but there is a sii�nificant amount of land left that is zoned comnercial to heavy industrial. The question has been discussed at times as to whether the City should be doing some rezoning of some of that land to R-3 or C-] or C-2. 7hat could be an are�� where the Chamber could give the City some very good input. Mr, Kirberger stated the Fridley Chamber of Corronerce is ready and willing to work with the Caimunity Development Comn•ission in any possible way they can, Dr. Yos stated he was glad to hear the Chamber was interested in working with the Commission. He stated that as a camnissioner he was very interested in wnrking on some aspects of small busines�>es, and he was interested in getting involved in some way. He stated he wouid like to have someone from the Caimission attend a Chamber Board meeting or attend regular Chamber meetings as a guest, Ms. Van Fleet stated the meetings are th� second Thursday of each month during the lunch hour; however, starting this year, they have started a business after- hours meeting which will be held four tinaes a year beginning at 5-5:30 p.m, at Raffael`s. Some of the business people have had sane concerns about non-compliance from the City so she had invited all the City Council members. 7he business COhMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MEETING IMY 10 1983 PA6E 6 people and the City Council members were able to talk to each other in a friendly way, and she felt it was a very successful meeting. Mr. Kirberger stated the Cortmunity Deve7opment Cortmission could be a viable liaison between the Planning Comnission and the City Council by providing a relaxed atmosphere where a small business could cane and air their concerns and problems before going on fran there. Mr. Kirberger stated maybe the Chamber and the Caimission can cane up with more ideas, other than the five mentioned, so they can pool their ideas together and come up with 10-12 areas they can work on, taking one area at a time. Mr. Oquist stated that was a good idea. He stated that in the meantime, maybe the Commission can designate a liaison to the Chamber of Commerce, and, like- wise, the Chamber could have someone attend Cartmission meetings when an issue comes up that would be of interest to the Camiission. Mr. Kirberger stated that regarding item �Y3 about the possibility of the City and the Chamber co-sponsoring activities, educational seminars, etc., he would liY.e to have a better definition of what was meant by "educational seminars". Dr. Yos stated he felt they were referring to educational seminars that would be directed at the business cortmunity. Mr. Kirberger stated one area could be to educate the business canmunity on how to better understand the terminology that is used in zoning or requirements set up by the City, to work better together and to develop these rules or regulations. Another area would be how to read a finance report and other "how to's". He stated they have members af the Chamber who could give these kinds of seminars and these seminars would then be open to anyone who wanted to attend. Mr. Oquist stated the Cortmission could also be a sponsoring body for seminars relating to energy and environmental quality, for example, getting the Energy Cortmission and Environomental Quality Comnission involved as presenting bodies. Mr, Oquist stated an interesting project would be to sponsor a show in order to let the people of Fridley know about the businesses and industries that are in Fridley. It may help people take a little more pride in Fridley to know what is actually being manufactured in Fridley. Mr. Burch stated the City has just started to organize what will be called "Frid7ey Days" in September, highlighting two days to show off some of the things that have been done in the City in the last 2-3 years; for example, the Spring- brook Nature Center, the piaza, and the Camwnity Park. Maybe this wouid be a time for the businesses to participate. Mr, Kirberger stated he would like the Carmission to look into the"Fridley Days" further and let them know more about it. Mr. Oquist stated this should be an agenda item at their next meeting to discuss and learn more about it. COhMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMI_SS1_ON MEETING. MAY 10 1983 PAGE 7 Ms. Van Fleet stated the Chamber puts out a monthly newsletter. If the Ca�mission members would like to receive it. she would be happy to put them on the mailing list. The Carmissioners agreed they would like to receive the Chamber's monthly newsletter, Mr. Kirberger thanked the Comnission for i�viting them to the meeting. Mr, Oquist thanked Mr. Kirberger and Ms. Van Fleet for caning. He stated this meeting has been very worthwhile, and he was looking forward to getting some- thing going, ADJOURNMENT: NOTION BY DR, V(xS, SECONDED BY MR, SCHMZDT, TD AAIDURN THE lNEETING. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTSNC, AYE, CXAIRPERSON OpUIST DECLARED THE XAY 10� 2983� CafMUNITY DE[�ELOpMENT COMMZSSION MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:06 P.l1. Respectfully submitted, yl. nne' a a/ ftecording 5ecretary CITY OF FRIDLEY HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING MAY 12, 1983 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Commers called the May 12, 1983, Housing & Redevelopment Authority meeting to order at 7:40 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present Members Absent Larry Comners, Elmars Prieditis, Duane Prairie Carolyn Svendsen, Walter Rasm�ssen Others Present: Jerrold Boardroan, City Planner Dave Newman, City Attorney Sid Inman, City Finance Director Mentor "Duke" Addicks, �r., Pepin, Dayton, Herman, Attorneys at Law (See Attached List) Howard Helgen, St. Phillips Human Services, Inc. Graham & Getts APPROVAL OF MARCH 31 1983 HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES: MOTION BY MR. PRIEDITIS. SECONDED BY MR. PRAIRIE� TO APPROVE THE MARCH 3I� I983� HOUSING & REDE'VEIAPMENT AUTXORITY MINUTES AS WRITTEN. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOSING RYE� CFiAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. APPROYAL OF APRIL 27 1983 HOUSIN6 & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES: MOTION BY MR. PRIEDITIS, SECONDED .c:',4�r, PRAIRIE, TO APPROVE THE APRIL 27, .2983, HWSING 6 REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORZTY MTNUTES AS k'R.iTTEN. UPON R VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, CHRZRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CRRRIED UNANZMOUSLY. AD(1pTI0N OF AGENDA: Mr. Boardman exp7ained that this was a new item on the agenda. It gave the HRA or the Staff an opportunity to add new items to the agenda. He added the following i'taa as Item #3: Letter to Steve Hardel dated May 6, 1983 MOTION BY MR, PRAIRIE, SECONDED BY MR. PRIEDTTIS, TO ADD 2HE FOLLt)WING STEM TO THE AGENDA AS ZTEM N3: LETTER TO STEVE HRRDEL DATED MAY 6� I9B3, UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTIIYG AYE, CHAZRPERSON COMMERS DECLAREA THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. HOUSING & REDEVELOAMENT AUTHORI7Y MEETING MAY 12 1983 PAGE 2 1. OF � Mr. Boardman stated tfiis request was discussed in his memo q83-46; however, he did want to tell the HRA that there are other alternatives involved; (1} to retain the property within the district; (2) to act in favor of the petition and set up public hearings necessary to remove the properties from the district; or i3) attempt to negotiate or compromise by agreement with the neighborhood to include the property within the district. Mr, Addicks stated he is an attorney practicing law in Minneapo7is. He started with his law firm this past January. and before that he was the Legislative Counsel for the League of Minnesota Cities for about nine years and the author of the hand- book which the City of Fridley uses in its affairs. He drafted and lobbied through the first state-wide tax increment authority bill back in the mid-1970's. He stated �e is familiar with Housing & Redevelopment Authorities and the use of tax increment flnancing. Mr. Addicks stated that in reviewing the HRA's minutes and the testimony at their hearings, it seemed clear to him that the residences involved in tbe petition were not properly included and should not be included in the redevelopment plan and project, They are asking that the NRA start the process to exclude these residences and that as part of the motion for exclusion that written notice be mailed to these haneowners concerning any future attempt to redeve7op the property. As the HRA will notice by their minutes, the residents involved did not participate in any of the pub]ic hearings back in 1981 when the redevelopment plan and project were established. Mr. Addicks stated the first question was: What type of property are they talking about? Tn his hand-out (a handwritten letter with attachments), he stated there was a map which shows the area they are requesting be excluded. They are not including the property just to the north which is included in the tax increment financing district. The residences they are concerned with are only within the redevelopment project and are not contained within any tax increment financing district, except for Parcel 2440 which is two pieces of rental property which he believed was included within the tax increment district but separated by one lot from the district. Mr, Addicks stated they wou7d like to show the HRA some slides of the residences from a variety of viewpoints to give the HRA an idea of the property being talked about. These are all single family homes. Nelson's rental property (two houses - Parcel 2400): front house, 900 sq. ft., built about 1945 estimated market value of the two residences because one parcel is for tax purposes: $59,400 non-homesteaded tax: $1,703.58 on both pieces of property Mr. Addicks believed both structures were located within the small portion of the tax increment district. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING MAV 12 19g3 PA6E 3 Nelson's hane, 6080 Central Ave. (Parcel 2420): Two-story walk-out, ],092 sq, ft., with attached greenhouse with pool, 1,408 sq. ft. Built in 1979 Est, market value: $133,800 Homestead 7ax: $2,670/yr, Rush's hane, 6028 Central Ave. (Parcel 2540): House bui7t about 40 yrs. ago, 1,176 sq. ft. Lot size: 100' x 395' Est, market value: $66,000 Wiemann's home, 6044 Central Ave. (Parce7 2500): House built in 1958, 3,600 sq, ft. Lot Size; 100' x 450' Est. Market va7ue: $83,40� Gray's home,6062 Central Ave. (Parcel 2460): House built in 1945, 2,800 sq, ft. Lot size: 100' x 350' Est, market value: $73,600 Mr. Addicks stated that in conjunction with the petition which was mailed and filed with the City, there were signed petitions from the neighborhood supporting the original petition. There were approximately 737 signatures on these petitions. Mr. Commers accepted the petitions consisting of 11 pages for filing and clarification. Mr. Addicks stated the Nelson's also took sane photographs of their property including some pictures of the inside of their home for the HRA to look at, Mr. Addicks stated these are nice homes in good shape, fairly recently built, with a fair amount of market value on them indicating sane substance. Mr. Addicks stated he would like to go through the material attached to his hand- written memo to support his legal opinion that the homes should not have been included in the redevelopment project and ought to be excluded 6oth as a matter of law and, more importantly, as a matter of fairness to the residents who have heen on this property for some time. Mr. Addicks stated the first document in the hand-out was a copy of a memo �81-73 from the HRA Executive Director to the HRA dated Feb. 1981 concerning the establishment of the Moore Lake Redevelopment Area. The first paragraph indicates that the Moore Lake Redevelopment area, "by definition, can be considered blighted due to under-utilization, traffic safety, major soi7 problems and some deteriorated structures". Mr. Addicks stated the Redevelopment P1an was attached later in the hand-out, but he would like to call the HRA's attention to Resolution HRA 6-1981 entitled, HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, MAY 12 1983 PAGE 4 "Resolution Approving the Moore Lake Redevelopment Plan and Filing of a Project Application to the City Council of the City of Fridley". He would like to call attention to the third and fourth "Whereas": "The said Redevelopment Project is blighted and deteriorated due to economic obsolescence of canmercial and residential structures, poor soil conditions, development patterns, traffic and parkfng design and unsightly general conditions; and, Whereas, the Housing & Redevelopment Authority has determined it is necessary to undertake a Redevelop- ment project for the purpose of removing, preventing or reducing biight, blight- ing factors or causes of blight through any work or undertakings as are allowed by MSA Chapter 462.421, Subdivision 13." Mr. Addicks stated that regarding the finding that the "area is blighted and deteriorated due to economic obsolescence of comrtiercial and residential structures" he did not see that concerning the property involved here. "Poor soil conditions" he stated there certainly are poor soil conditions under most of frid7ey. "Poor development patterns" - he did not know. That was a determination the HRA would have to make. "Traffic and parking design" - there certainly are traffic problems up and down Old Central. "Unsightly general conditions" - perhaps the property to the north of these residences is blighted, but these residences certainly are not. Mr. Addicks stated the next document is page 7 of the HRA's March 26, 1981, public hearing meeting minutes, at which time testimony was gathered from various wit- nesses to support the Moore Lake Redevelopment Plan and Project. This portion concerns the testimony of Mr. Boardman, not as the Executive Director of the HRA, but as the City Pianner, In the third paragraph, Mr, Boardman stated that "he felt these areas (Areas 7, 2, and 3- Mr, Addicks stated they are only concerned about Area 1 right now) would be eligible under State Law as a blighted condition for a redevelopment district. He stated he would 7ike to point out that under MSA 462.421, Subd. 13, a Redevelopment Project shall mean any work or undertaking: (1) To acquire blighted areas or other rea7 property for the purpose of removing, preventing, or reducing blight, blighting factors, or the causes of blight. (Mr. Addicks stated there is no blight on these particular residences.) (2) To acquire open or undeveloped land which is determined to be blighted...due to the existence of faulty planning characterized by the subdivision of sale of lots laid out...or inadequate size... which have prevented normal development of the land by private enterprise and have resulted in a stagnant and unproductive condition of land potentially useful and valuable... (3) To acquire land or space wfiich is vacant, unused, underused, or inappropriately used," Mr. Addicks stated that in the next paragraph, Mr. Boardman is talking about Area 1. He sur�narizes some testimony from witnesses saying that the testimony basically "shows that the area was blighted due to conditions of unusual and HOUSING & REDEVELOPMEN7 AUTHORITY MEETING, MAY 12, 1983 PAGE 5 difficult physical characteristics of the ground,,,blighted due to faulty arrange- ment which creates conditions of traffic safety hazards...also, there was vacant land located just north of West Moore Lake Drive that was unused due to obsolete layout of existing structures". Mr. Addicks stated Mr. Boardman did not mention these residences located in Area 1. In fact, not in any pf the testimony was there any mention of these residences. The only mention he had found of them was in the minutes of the tax increment financing district approval to the north of this property, There was a mention of one of the rental str�ctures in a survey one of the city officials did of the various structures within the entire Moore Lake Redeve7opment area,but it was only of one of the older rental properties and no mention was made anywhere of the residential structures. He did not know if the HRA was aware that there were nice homes here or the condition of those homes, and he felt that should have been brought out more at the public hearings as evidence. He did not see how they were proper7y included in the Redevelopment Project. Mr. Addicks stated the next document is the Moore Lake Redevelopment Plan upon which the project is Dased and upon which the later tax increment districts created were based. On page 2 of that Plan, Paragraph 6, Eligibility, stated: "The Moore Lake Redevelopment District is eligible as a publicly assisted redevelopment district for the following reasons: Area 1(paragraph 3): Tbe land area south and east of the shopping center is largely vacant and underutilized due to poor soil conditions." (Again no mention of the six residences.) "This property is blighted because of the cost to make this land developa6le. In addition to the soil problems, the City will be initiating a restoration project for Moore Lake which will assess this property with necessary costs of the project." Second sentence of paragraph 3 stated: "This area is the drainage inlet to Moore Lake wfiich is primarily unstable soil for development," Mr. Addicks again stated there is a lot of concern about poor soil conditions being the grounds for the inclusion of this entire property within the project area. Mr. Addicks stated that page 6 of the Redevelopment Plan gives the first indica- tion of the residential homes. Under Area 1, middle of the paragraph, it stated: "The land east of Highway 65 north and south of Rice Creek Road including: Shorewood Shopping Center, Sears Surplus Store, Shorewood Inn, and seven residen- tial homes." Again, no mention of the types of homes and the cond� ion o t e omes, ot er than their existence. Mr. Addicks stated that on pahe 12 of the Redevelopment Plan was the "Procedure f�r Amendment" which stated that the "Moore Lake Redevelopment Plan may be modi- fied pr�vided the modification shall be adopted by tfie Fridley Nousing and Redevelopment Authority and the Fridley City Council under the provisions of the Municipal Housing and Redevelopment Act of the State of Minnesota, Section 462.525, Subdivision 6". Mr. Addicks stated that, as stated in his May 5, 1983, letter to the HRA, at the public hearing on the Moore Lake Redevelopment Plan, Mr. Boardman had stated that "under State Law in setting up a redevelopment district, there are findings HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING MAY 12 1983 PAGE 6 that have to be made by the HRA. Those findings are laid out in the definitions, First of all, the HRA must determine the area is blighted or deteriorated. He read the definition of 'deteriorated' into the record". Mr. Addicks stated he would now like to draw the NRA's attention to the definition in the Statutes, which was the definition Mr. Boardman fiad quoted into the minutes: "Subdivision il. 'Deteriorated area' means any area witfi buiidings or improvements which, by reason of dilapidation, obsolescence, overcrowding, faulty arrangement or design, lack of venti7ation, light, and sanitary facilities, excessive land coverage or deieterious land use or obsolete 7ayout, or any can- bination of these or other factors, are detrimental to the safety, health, morals, or welfare of the canmunity." Mr, Addicks referred to Subdivision 13 which is what the HRA adopted in their March 26, 1981, minutes: "'Redevelopment project' shall mean any work or under- taking: (1) to acquire blighted areas and other rea] property for the purpose of reroovin , preventing, or reducing blight, blighting factors, or the causes of filight; (2�} to acquire open or undeveloped land which is determined to be blighted by virtue of cond9tions of unusua7 and difficult physical characteristics of the ground; or the existence of faulty planning characterized by the subdivision of sale of lots laid out in disre9ard of the contours or of irreguiar form and shape or of adequate size...." Mr. Addicks stated again the argument that seems to be used in the inclusinn of most of the property, at least in Area 1, is that the area was blighted by virtue of conditions of unusual and difficult physical characteristics of the ground. Altf�ough he agreed the ground under these residences is poor soil, poor soil really refers in Subd. 13 to open property or undeveloped land. Poor soil, according to legislative history and the law, cannot be used to define blight or property that already has development on it. Main]y poor soi7 is used as an argu- ment for using tax increment financing for various schemes cities get involved in for financing vacant property. mainly used to finance the development of property that has undeveloped vacant land which has poor soil conditions. It was very clear, at least in his mind, that poor soil was not a condition of blight in areas which have already been developed. Ciearly here, none of the residences are blighted in any way, shape, or form. Mr. Addicks stated he thought the property was rightly not included in the taY increment financing plan. He believed that to use tax increment financing on this parcel, they have to create sanething different, an economic development district, which couTd be based on the plan they have but they would have to make several different findings in order to use the economic development plan. Thus, it was a matter of law and, more importantly, a matter of fairness to ti�e people that they be excluded fran the redevelopment plan and project area and provision made for written notice so that in the fut�re, if they are to 6e included in an economic development area, they can attempt to participate in the creation of an economic development area. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMEP(f AUTHORITY MEETING MAY 12 1983 PAGE 7 Mr. Comners asked if Mr. Addicks had any disagreement with the manner in which the notices were given in the original creation of the plan and district. Mr. Addicks stated he believed the HRA did follow the legal procedures involved in notification and publication. The law does not require that notices be mailed to residences. Mr. Commers stated that, as he understood it, the essence of Mr. Addicks' argu- ment was that since it is a redevelopment district, the definitions Mr. Addicks was talking about in terms of blight, and specifical7y the findings that appear to rely to a great extent on soil problems, indicate that these properties do not meet those conditions and definitions to be included in the district. Mr. Addicks stated that was essential7y correct. Mr. Addicks stated the residents were at the meeting and would be happy to answer any questions the commissioners might have, Mr, Comners asked Mr. Boardman that in going back into the minutes regarding this project, did they initially start out with it being anything other than a redevelop- ment project? Mr. Boardman stated, no, they had always intended to set it up as a redevelopment district, There are actually two districts involved--the redevelopment district which is the 462 district 7aying out the general boundaries in which the HRA can operate, and the actual tax increment districts that were established as projects within the redevelopment district. Mr, Comners stated that with regard to the inclusion of the specific parce7s within the project itse7f, did Mr. Boardman recall or do the minutes reflect any mention of those parcels, other than just being poinied out in the plan? Mr, Boardman stated there were none that he was aware of. One of the reasons the parcels were included was primarily to develop an overall integral system within the district. He stated he has gone through the minutes, and their con- versations were primari7y directed toward the vacant property north of Moore Lake. l�ir, Comners stated it Nas his recollection that the HRA was aware that the homes were there, but that there was not a great deal of discussion, if any, relating specifically to them. Mr, Boardman stated the homes were pointed out in the legal descriptions, and it was pointed out in the discussion that there were seven homes, but there was not a lot of discussion at that point on the hanes themselves. Mr. Prieditis stated the HRA'e primary interest was in the nortf�ern end of the district, also some questions about the traffic, and that the traffic was hoped ta be improved with same development within the district. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING MAY 12 1983 PAGE 8 Mr. Comners stated he remembered they were very concerned about the drainage into the ]ake. If anything was done with the lake, would that require any type of work or improvements to be made to these parcels that face along the east side of the lake? Mr. Boardman stated that would be a possibility, Tfiey have presently gone through a condemnatSon on some of that property with the faelson's to put in the necessary pipes and drainage system to bypass sane of the drainage into the Moore Lake system. He stated one of the things they were very concerned about was the traffic and the traffic generated on Old Central. Mr. Commers asked if the City had an easement across the back of the Nelson's property. Mr. Dave Newman stated that on one parce7 of the property, a condemnation process has occurred. They do have an easement for one portion of it; but there is another storm sewer system, and there are sane legal questions on the easement for that, Mr. Commers asked about the question raised by Mr, Addicks regarding the definition of blight and the ability to use that on approved parcels of property. Mr. Boardman stated Mr. Addicks was talking primarily about the vacant property definition in which it talks about soils with unusual conditions. He thought it was their intent in including these houses that there is blight from other condi- tions, blight due to unusual layout or blight due to 7ayout of property that under- uti7izes land. He thought that was one of the reasons why the property across the street to the east and up around Rice Creek Road and Old Central was also included as part of the redevelopment district. Mr. Commers asked if it was necessary to make sure that each parcel within the district qualifies or meets a definition in order to justify the plan or to look at the district as a whole. Mr. Boardman stated it was his understanding with the legal opinion he had at that time that they did not have to take each individual parce7 and define each parcel as blight. All they had to do was define the general condition of tfie area as blighted. For that reason, they took the large major portions of property and described those major portions in the discussions. At that time they were using Holmes & Graven. He felt if they proceed further, they will need furtfier legal advice as to whether the definition they used was an appropriate definition. He still felt it was an appropriate definition and that not each and every parcel within the property has to be described as a 6lighted parcel. Mr. Newman stated he would concur with Mr. Boardman. He felt the definition of deteriorated area was talking in genera7 terms. Without having done extensive research, he would think it was talking about general areas of development. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING MAY 12 1983 PAGE 9 Mr. Cortmers stated that if the parcels are excluded from the redevel�pment area, did Mr. Boardman see any disadvantages? Mr. Soardman stated there could be some disadvantages to the HRA. It depends on the overall plan, how the property to the north is deve7oped, and what kind of associations they want for that property, including the traffic, parks and recrea- tion, bikeway/wa1kway access, and other things that are involved in an overall development of a plan. If these residences are eliminated, the HRA may be limited in their effectiveness in theoveral7 development of the district. They would have to work around the property, and it may cause some problems and may cause some differences in their plan which may affect the overall development of the plan. Mr. Newman pointed out that Area 2, the southern portion, includes Heather Hills which has $300,000 homes. Under any general definition of bighted, certainly these homes are not blighted, but it could very well mean that under statutory definition for overall development, that area is properly within the district. He thought it was important they don't look only at the general definition but to keep in mind the statutory definition. Mr, Prieditis asked if any of the property owners or busi�esses in Area 2 had asked to be excluded from the redevelopment district. Mr, Boardman stated no other property owners or businesses had asked to be excluded fram the district. Mr. Commers asked Mr. Boardman if he had anything he vrould like to bring to the HRA's attention at this point. Mr, Boardman stated he had done sane quick calculations based on the lot areas. The square footage for a normal sized lot under city code is 9,000 sq. ft. Based on that figure, if they redeveloped the area just where the homes are located into single family residences, they should be able to put in approximately 3� single family units. Mr. Canmers asked if Staff opposed the exclusion of these homes, or did Staff have enough information to make a recommendation or were there any other dis- cussions with the homeowners to see if there were any compromises. It seemed unfair to keep something hanging over these homeowners' heads indefinitely. Mr. Boardman stated he had talked briefly with Mr. Addicks about whether there was any possibility of compromise with the homeowners. There are some things the HRA can do such as delay any acquisition of these homes for a period of years or they can set up a first right of refusal on purchase. Mr. Addicks stated he did have a meeting with his clients at which they discussed the alternative of deferring development of those parcels of property for a stated period of years (10-12 yr. contract), perhaps purchasing the property if any of the haneowners were willing to se11 for the fair market value during the contract period. He stated his clients were unanimously opposed feeling that by the time HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING MAY 12 1983 PAGE 10 10-12 years had passed they would be much closer to retirement, into retirement, or well into retirement and then be faced with the loss of their properties at probably a worse time in their lives. Mr. Addicks stated he fe]t the HRA should keep in mind the definition of a Redevelopment Project, which is what they are rea7ly talking about. Again, referring to Subd. 13 of the State Statutes, it states that a"Redevelopment Project shall mean any work or undertaking: (1) to acquire blighted areas and other real property for the purpose of removing, or reducing blight, blighiing factors, or the causes of blight". He stated sub-paragraph 1 primarily refers to property which has things on it, primarily residences, but could also mean property with businesses on it. Sub-paragraph 2 states: "to acquire open or undeveloped land which is determined to be blighted 6y virtue of conditions of unusual and difficult physical characteristics of the ground". Under that sub- division they intentionally �ad to amend the law to include poor soil and improper size of the lots and the strange shapes of undeve7oped land because, historically, that has never been considered blight and to remove some legal arguments to people who were opposed to using tax increment for undevelop�d land, Mr, Addicks stated what he heard Mr. Boardman saying was that because these things are considered to be blight as dealing with undeveloped or vacant land, therefore it must be bTighted under the previous sub-paragraph. He stated he did not think that was an appropriate way to read that, because that had to be included to make it clear to the legislature that even though these things were not b7ight, there were good reasons to include undeveloped property in a redevelopment project. Mr. Addicks stated that when he was with the League of Minnesota Cities and work- ing with cities concerning the areas of redevelopment projects, it was often a technique of the cities to incTude within the project area hanes that were adjacent to a blighted area. He stated that does not work very well because people get very upset about it and there has been some litigation. Certainly if there has been blighted areas within which and in the midd7e of which are scattered some pretty nice homes, those areas have generally been considered to be part of the blight with tfie catch-ail definition because they are totally within a blighted area and surrounded by blight. In this situation where the residences are kind of adjacent to a"blighted" area, he did not know if it could even be called a blighted area, because he did not think this blightedness met the defin9tion of sub- paragraph 2 under Subd. 13, which may or may not be bligfited but certain7y it was appropriate land to be irtcluded in a redeve7opment project. Mr. Commers stated he did not want to get into the varying legal opinions of the definitions. The HRA has their lawyer, too, and they have to rely on his advice in this matter. Mr. Prieditis stated if he could see some technical problem in exclusing the properties which would mean they were not able to develop or make improvements within Area 1 and the redeve7opment district, he would be inclined to keep the residences within the district. But, if there were no technical problems, and by looking at the map, he did not see that much of a problem, fie would like to propose that the HRA proceed and start the process for the removal of these resi- dences fran the district. HOUSING & REDEVEL�PMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, MAY 12. 1983 PAGE 11 Mr Prairie asked what kind of problems could result in any of the three areas if the HRA removed these residences from the district. Would it set a precedent? Mr. Boardman stated it was his feeling that if they start eliminating properties from the redevelopment district (he was not talking about eliminating properties from the tax increment district), they could have some problems as far as the fragmentation of the overall planning of what the HRA is trying to accomplish. He stated the HRA inc7uded the Shorewood Center and the commercial property across the street. He thought there were some real problem conditions, and one of the objectives of trying to bring that whole area up deals with building some resi- dential density in the district. Included with that residential density is the development of a livable space which includes recreation, access, a 6ikeway/ walkway, handling the traffic problems, and a wfiole series of things that have to be 7ooked at. By fragmenting the space, they are restricting their capabilities of looking at that, restricting their possible access points, restricting tfieir potentia] for improvements, and restricting their ability to do the overall plan. Mr. Boardman stated one thing they looked at was the consistency of the plan and putting the plan together as a cohesive unit. That is why they set up their base district. On top of that, they use their tax increment district to develop projects. Then tax increment funds can be used anywhere in the redevelopment area for road improvements, drainage, etc. When they start eliminating redevelopment districts, they limit what they can spend as far as their tax increment dollars. They can no longer spend their tax increment dollars in areas outside the redevelop- ment district. If, by removing these homes from the overall district, they hamper their ability to improve that overall district, he felt the HRA would not have done what they were initially established to do. The questions they have to ask them- selves are: Do they want those homes in the overall district? By being out of the district, does the HRA feel those properties would hamper their overall improve- ment of the district, or is there some ability to canpromise? Mr. Commers stated the HRA has no intention of acquiring these people's homes. It happened to come in the context because of the condominium project proposal, but there are all kinds of homes in the redevelopment area and they have no inten- tion of acquiring any homes. Mr. Ed Kaspszak, 1317 Hillcrest Dr., stated there are going to be a lot of changes in 25 years, and there are going to be a lot of changes in ownership. What is true today may not be true five years from now. His suggestion was that until there is a real demand for this property, the HRA shou7d not tamper with it. He understood what the HRA is trying to do, but he felt that when the time is right and the project is ri9ht for this area, the people wi17 accept it and there won't be all these problems. Mrs, Lorraine Nelson, 6080 Central Ave., stated that regarding the easement problem mentioned earlier, they have an easement going partial7y through their yard, and they were not opposed to the easement. The question arose when the City went half way across their yard when the City could have just followed the line down below. The City's reason was they did not want to cross over a sewer line, but a little farther down, about 100 ft., they did cross the other sewer HOUSIN6 & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, MAY 12 1983 PAGE 12 line. She stated they felt if the City cou7d cross the sewer line farther down, the City could have done the same in their back yard. She did not think people were afraid of easements; there was just a misunderstanding in this case. Mr. Leo Nelson, 6065 Central Ave., stated that Mr. Boardman made the statement about the area where the homes are located not being developed to its maximum potential and that 9,000 sq. ft. was a71 that is required for bui7ding a house, It was his understanding that 9,000 sq, ft. was the minimum, and he hoped any big development plans did not include development to just minimum requirements, Mr. Bi11 Donohue, 1316 Hilicrest Dr., stated he would like to know the circum- stances by which the line was drawn to include these residences. It seemed a terrible injustice to just draw a line and include these people's homes when they are already paying very good taxes on their properties. Mr. Dan Nelson, 6080 Centrel Ave., stated that in looking at the district, Area 1 looks like a big district; however, most of it is the iake itself, about one-fourth is the park and recreation area, and a smal] portion is their homes which consti- tutes about 10 acres of land. He would like to know the total taxes that 10 acres produces as opposed to�what the HRA thinks it might produce. He stated a township is composed of 23,014 square acres. This ]0 acres is producing quite a bit of taxes and is on7y representing .0004% of tfie City of Fridley. He stated there isn't much that can be developed in there that would produce any more than they are producing in their taxes right now. He thought it was a shame that it is even being considered, and their homes shou7d be ruled out of the redevelopment district. Mr. Commers stated they have no project before them at this time to indicate they are considering taking those homes and redeveloping. Mr, Boardman is talking about any incidental use of some of the property they might need to develop other parcels. It does preseht problems if they exclude these properties, because if they exclude these homes, why not exclude other homes across the street and others on Rice Creek Road? It is not so simple as saying the HRA is being unfair or treating this roughly. There has been a district set up by public hearing, people gave testimony on why they felt the line should be drawn the way it was. The HRA had no information to the contrary and set up the district based on the testimony they did have. Mr. Dan Nelson stated he has had offers to buy the front portion of his land. As a realtor or as a seller, he did not feel he could honestly sell that land to anyone who wants to develop nice homes without telling that person that tfie area is in a redevelopment district. He is being hampered as a private citizen and cannot move in the general direction of good business because of this situation. He stated he has also had an offer on his rental property, and again he is bound hand and foot because of this district. He wanted the HRA to know there are a lot of things that take place with their decision. Mrs. Lorraine Nelson asked why the HRA couldn't exclude their homes from the district, Then, if the City feels they need to use part of their property, they can come and ask them and some compromises can be made, HOUSIN6 & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING MAY 12 1983 PA6E 13 Mr. Boardman stated there are sane real questions as to whether the HRA can use tax increment monies outside the tax increment district or the redevelopment district. Mr, Prieditis stated he felt any kind of compromise can be made and a good design and good develapment can be worked around some fixed situations. He was looking in terms of why is there an HRA and why are they trying to do things. He felt the answer to that was probably to make the maximum amount of people happy and for the 9ood of the total community. If they are making seven families unhappy and insecure, then why should this be done? As far as building density, it should never becane a goal. He did not agree with the philsophy that the maximum use of the land is some sort of idea], He wou7d propose the HRA leave these residences alone and remove their properties from the redevelopment district. Mr. Newman stated it was his understanding that there has been a trend at the 7egislature to restrict the use of various development plans. If they do exclude the property at this time and at a later date try to include it, the conditions and requirements may be different and tfie property may be such at that time that it doesn't meet those requirements. Mr. Boardman stated the statement was being made that whenever the HRA wanted that property back in the redevelopment district, all they had to do was have a public hearing and put it back in. That was not necessarily the case. Mr, Newman had brought up the point that at a future date, they may not 6e able to put it back in. The redeve]opment districts may be eliminated at tfiat time. Wfien the property is included in the district, any improvements within that section would also require a public hearing. Mr, Boardman stated redevelopment districts are not necessarily negative from the perspective that it is taking property. Redevelopment districts can be beneficial in the sense that improvements are happening. Even if the HRA feels they do not want to acquire the homes, he still felt the homes should be included in the redevelopment plan and then some type of compromise made that s8ys the homes will be ]eft in the district for the purposes of .... Mr. Addicks stated maybe sanething could be worked out. If the HRA doesn't intend to take the homes in the near future for redevelopment, but want to use the properties for purposes incidental to the development to the north, maybe some kind of language could be drafted for inclusion of this property in the redevelop- ment district. He stated he would discuss this with his clients. Mr. Commers stated the HRA would continue with their agenda while Mr. Addicks discussed the possibi7ity of some kind of compranise with his clients, 2. CONSIDERATION � ELDPMENT" BY ST. PNILLIPS Mr. Howard Helgen stated he was a member of the St. Phillips Human Services, Inc., comunittee. He stated he had a drawing he would like to present to the HRA. HOUSING & REOEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING MAY 12 1983 PAGE 14 Mr, Helgen stated that the plans have been changed from a building of 60 units to a building of 40 units. The reason for the change from 60 units to 40 units is because this is a HUD project. Their consultant fe7t that with the number of units available for the entire metropo7itan area, it would be very unlikely that St. Phillips could get funded for a 60 unii building, because there are not that many units available. Mr. Heigen stated the drawing shows the building on the corner of Old Central and Rice Creek Road, and it encompasses approx. 167,000 sq. ft. Much of the area is unbuildable, and it was possible that by cutting off an edge of the property, they can get by with using around 120,000 sq. ft. Mr. Boardman stated that on May 2, the City Counci] approved putting $80,500 of CDBG funds into the project, The maximum the HRA can put in is $320,Q00. If the land cost is more than that, that excess land cost has to be a6sorbed by 5t. Phillips. Mr. Helgen stated he has been in contact with Mr. Saliterman, who is the owner of the property. Mr. Helgen stated he has had some pre]iminary negotiations with Mr. 5aliterman and he felt it was possible to reach a negotiated price with Mr. Saliterman, Mr. Saliterman has agreed informally to bear the cost of soil correction. Mr. Boardman stated the cost of soi7 correction for the building was a6out $600/unit. With 40 units, that would be $240,000 for soil correction costs. Mr. Boardman stated St. Phillips Human Services, Inc., is asking for right of development. This right of development is based on 40 units, Because of the lower interest rate, the amount of bonding capacity is a6out the same as last year. He would recommend they see what they can do to reduce tfie amount of land that is necessary for the deveiopment and to do the development right so they can elfminate some of the land costs. Mr. Helgen stated that if they get right of development, he would work out an option on the property with Mr. Saliterman before they su6mit the appTication. By doing that, they feel they would have a stronger chance of getting the funds, Ne stated he thought they cou)d acquire enough space within tfie property and stay within the parameters of $240,000 and the $80,500 CDBG funds. MOTION BY MR. PRIEDITIS, SECONDED $Y DII2. PRRSAIE� TO GRANT A RIGHT OF DEVEIAPMENT TO ST. PHZLLZPS HUMAN SERVTCES, SNC., AS REQUESTED IN 1NR. BOARDMAN'S MEMO Ji83-45 AND RS OUTLINED IN MR. BOARDMAN'S LETTER TO ST. PHILLIPS HUMAN SERVICES, ZNC., DATED MAY 13, 2983. _ Mr. Commers suggested that Mr. Helqen meet with Staff and the City Attorney to find out the mechanics on how the option should be written. UPON A VOZCE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECI.ARED TNP MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMEN7 AUTHORITY MEETING, MAY 12, 1983 PAGE 15 3. LETTER TO STEUE HARDEL DATED MAY 6, 1983: Mr. Boardman stated they are still trying to compromise on condemnation based on new information gotten from HUO. Tfiey do have the potential for more exposure than the $81,500. For example, if they go into the condemnation hearinq and at the condemnation hearing, they say the value of that property is $73,000, thP City still has an exposure of $15,000 relocation on top of the $73,000, so they could have the potential of $88,000 instead of $81,500. In lieu of condemnation, this letter dated May 6 was sent to Mr. Hardel making an offer of $81,500. That $81 500 gives him what he is allowed under relocation law with an appraised value of �66,000. Mr. Nardel has accepted the offer of $81,500 with the condition they also get a payback for the $A00 appraisal cost. Mr. Commers stated he would like the HRA to 9et a report on what is involved in relocation determinations. MOTION BY A42. PRAZRIE, SECONDED BY MR. PRZEDSTIS, TO RPPROVE TXE OFFER OF $81,500 ON TXE HARDEL PROPERTY. UFON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED TXE MOTZON CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, 4. CONTINUED: CONSIDERATION OF A PETITION FOR THE REMOVAL OF 6028-44-62-70-80 OLD CEPITRAL ENUE FROM 7HE MOORE LAKE REDEVEL P ENT IS RIC : Mr. Newman stated he has talked to Mr. Addicks, and there appears there may be some possibility of working out some compromise; however, they would like to have some time to work out the specifics and look at the legality. He would ]ike the HRA to continue this item until the next meeting and direct Staff to work out the details. Mr. Addicks stated that as long as their homes would be preserved and as long as they can have a fairly specific idea of what type of uses could be requested in the future, his clients felt fairly comfortable in working out an agreement, Mr, Addicks stated he wmuld like the HRA secretary to mark the slides and photo- graphs that had been presented as exhibits at the meeting. He would also request a copy of the minutes be sent to him. If there was anything in the minutes he would like elaborated furtfier, fie would write a letter to the City Council explain- ing his understanding of the conversations. The secretary recorded the slides as Exhibits 1-26 and the photographs as Exhibits 1-14, MOTION BY MR, PRAIRIE, SECONDED BY MR. PRIEDITIS, TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM ONTIL TXE NEXT MEETTNG. UPON A VOICE VOTE, RLL VOTING AYE� CXAIRpERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. HOUSIPJG & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING, MAY 72, 1983 PAGE 16 5. FINANCIAL REPORT: Mr. Canmers stated he had not been at the ]ast meeting, and he had had some questions about the financials. He stated he had talked to Mr, Inman, His questions related to the shifting of administrative expenses from the revolving fund to the construction fund, He had asked Mr. Inman to give a little bit of forecast as to what they would be spending in administrative expenses this year, and it looks ]ike it is going to be in the area of $90,000 this year with the next year being projected at $120,000. The purpose of tfiis was to see if they could perhaps direct Staff to give tfie HRA sane kind of breakdown between personnel salaries and costs and any other costs the HRA is reimbursing the City for. Mr, Inman stated that after he had ta]ked to Mr. Comners, he had asked Staff to begin to prepare what is called an "hours audit". He hoped to present this to the HRA soon, 6. CNECK REGISTER: MOTION BY MR, PRIEDITIS, SECONDED BY I�Z, PRAIRIE, SO RPPROVE T8E CNECK REGISTEft DRTED MAY 11, 1983, IN THE AMOt1NT OF $I1,115.64. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON COMMERS DECLARED THE MTOION CARRZED UNRNIMOUSLY. 7. OTHER BUSINE55: Mr, Prieditis stated that at the 7ast meeting, they had agreed to set up a special meeting for the purpose of discussing Phase 3 of the Center City Project. That meeting had not yet taken place. He felt very strongly that they should do some brainstorming about what they would iike to see happen over there in light of the criticism the HRA has received from the community and for those people who do not know what is going to happen there. Mr. Commers agreed, The rental of the hardware store could probably have been handled differently; but, otherwise, in terms of acquisition, they have had two rights of development and people have spent a lot of money tryin9 to deve7op it. It was just a resu7t of a lot of factors including a down-turn in the economy. that just made it impossibie to do anything. As far as the letters to the news- paper, he did not think a good portion of that criticism was justified. Con- versely, he thought the HRA has to do their best to try to gei someihing moving and perhaps it is necessary to have an outside group come in and make a study. The HRA members agreed to meet at 6:30 p.m, on June 9 to discuss Phase 3 of the Center City Project. ADJOURNMENT: Chairperson Commers declared the May 72, 1983, Housing & Redevelopment Authority meeting adjourned at 10:3o p.m. Respectfully submitted, L��k a, ecor ing ecretary 1�UU,Q��ti 1� �� La�'.z� �u.�J,'��!�+� � i�, /� � �� - ��%�� .�. �.�.�.... � .�° �� % �� o� � � � � � 6 o Y 5� �.-� Q�.c 71 �' �, �G ��z-��e �a�d �� %OCS �c� fT� ,�� E - �� - �l � 6� � s CD,�-�.� � . �. � . �� , -�� ,✓ �t' r� /i /�.�•ttl �� ti-- ��1, �� '� c� �{� , /h�t «--t., �� (� � � y �� i��s�Gu;b( � ^�� 1� i�ewmq�,� i�Co ' .,�c.e�P�,c�l .C�G �,� �-�-�- _5�--� x� 3 ,�'��.� �� 5i� �� '�` l 3 3� J�� tii �..� ��,� 13 � � �z5�- ,��- �� S8 3S Ql��.�fra ( �c 77,��t 6 o a�-�� c�..� /Y t � � � �� C�n �, CITY OF FRIDLEY PARKS 8 RECREATION COMMISSION MEETING MAY 16, 1983 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Kondrick called the May lb, 1983, Parks & Recreation Canmission meeting to order at 7:40 p.m. ROLL_ CALL: Members Present: Dave Kondrick, Mary Schreiner, Dan Allen, Dick Young (arr. 9:08 p.m.} Members Absent: Jan Seeger Others Present: Charles Boudreau, Parks & Recreation Director Jack Kirk, Recreation Supervisor __ APPROVAL OF APRIC 18, 1983, PARKS & RECREATION'COMMfSSION 1�ttNUTES: MOTION BY MS. SCHREINER� SECONDED 8Y MR. ALLEN� TO RPPROYE TXE APRZL 18� 19B3� PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES AS WRI2TEN. UPON A VOZCE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPERSON XONDRICK DECLARED TXE MOTION CARRIED UNANZMOUSLY. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: MOTION BY MR. ALLEN� SECQNDED BY MS. SCXREINER� TD APPI{OY$ Tf� A6ENDA RS WRITTEN. � ' � UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING RYE� CXAIRPERSON KONDRZCK DECI.ARED THE MOTZON CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 1. ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON AND UICE-CHAIRPERSON FOR 1983-1984: Mr. Kondrick dec]ared the nominations open for chairperson. Mr. Allen stated fie felt Mr. Kondrie[c had done an excellent job this past year� and he would like to nominate Mr. Kondrick for chairperson for a second year. Hearing no other nominations, Mr. Kondrick declared the naninations closed. NOTZON BY MR. ALLEN� SECONDED BY MS. SCXREINER� TO CAST A UNANIMIXIS BAZ.LOT FOR DAVE KONDRICK FOR CHAIRPERSON OF THE PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION FOR THE YEAR 1983-2984. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CXAIRPERSON KONDR2CK DEL'7,ARED TIfE 1HOT20N CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. PARKS & RECREATION COFMISSION MEETING MAY 16 1483 PAGE 2 Mr. Kondrick declared the naninations open for vice-chairperson. Mr. Allen stated he would also like to nominate Ms. Schreiner as vice-chairperson for a second year. Hearing no other naminations, Mr. Kondrick declared the nominations closed. MOTSON BY MR. ALyEN, SSCONDED BY MR. KONDRICX� TO CAST R UNANIMOUS BALLOT FOR MARY SCHREINER FOR VICE-CHAIRPERSON OF THE PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION FOR TXS YSAR 2983-2984. . UPON A VOICE VOTE. ALL VOTING AYE� CIiAIRPERSON XONDRSCX DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. � 2. OLD BUSINESS: a. Policy Manual Discussion Mr. Kirk stated that even though it was time-consuming, he felt the Commission members should continue to take eacfi section of the policy manual page by page, making corrections wfiere necessary, He stated they would be reviewing the "Program" section prepared 6y Mr, Allen. Mr. Kirk complimented Mr, Allen for a fine job in vmiting this section. The remainder of the meeting was spent reviewing the "Program" section af the policy manua7. (Mr. Young arrived at 9:08 p.m.) Mr. Kirk stated that this section would 6e prepared in final form and returned to the Cor+mission mem6ers. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION 8Y MS, SCHREINER� SECONDED BY MR, ALLEN� TO AD.7�RN TXE MEETING. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON ICONDRICX DECLARED TXE MAY 16� 1983, PARKS & RECREATZON COMMISSION MEETING AD.TOURNED AT 10:00 P.M. Respectfully su� yn Saba Recording Secretary CITY OF FRIDLEY ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COhP1ISSI0N MEETING - MAY 17, 1983 CALI TO ORDER: Chairperson Svanda called the May 17, 7983, Environmental Quality Comnission meeting to order at 7:40 p,m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Richard Svanda, Bruce Peterson, Maynard Nielson, Wayne Wellan Members Absent: Tom Gronlund Others Present: Bill Deblon, Associate Planner Connie Metcalf, SORT APPROVAL OF MARCH 15, 1983s,ENVIRONMENTAC SUALITY COFMISSION MINUTES: MOTZON BY l�i. PETERSON� SECONDBD BY MR. WELLAN� TO APPROYE THE MARCH I5� 2983, ENVIRONMENTAL QURLISY COMMiSSZON MINUTES AS WRITSEN, - UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYEi CHAIRPERSON SVANDA D�CLAFtEB THE MQTION CRRRZED UNANZMOUSLY. . . . .._ .__ _ . . . . . ... ... . . 1. ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON AND VICE-CFtAIRPERSDN �OR �T483�T984; Mr. 5vanda declared the naninations open for cfiairperson. Mr. Peterson nominated Mr. Svanda to continue as cfiairpersron of the Environmental Quality Co�nission. Mr. Svanda stated that his work has not been allowing him as much time as he would like to the Comnission. If he was elected cfiairperson, he would be looking for the vice-chairperson to take a lead role in working with the recycling issue, particularly if the Commission is going to look serious7y at setting up a meeting with the waste haulers. .NO2ION BY MR. PETERSON, SECONDED BY MR. NIELSON, TO CAST A UNRNIHOUS BALLOT FOR RICHARD SVANDA FOR CHAIRPERSON OF THE ENVZRONHENTAL QUALITY COMMISSION. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CXAIRPERSON SVANDA DECLARED THE MOTION CARRZED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Svanda declared the nominations open for vice-chairperson. Mr. Peterson nominated Mr. Nielson to continue as vice-chairperson of the Environmental Quality Carmission. ENVIRONMFNTAL QUALITY COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 17, 1983 PAGE 2 MOTIOP7 BY MR. PETERSON� SECONDED BY MR. WELLAN� TO CAST A UNANIMOUS BALLOT FOR MAYNARD NIELSON FOR VICE-CHRIRPERSON OF THE ENVSRONMENTRL QUALITY COMMISSION, UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� CHASRPERSON SVANDA DECLARED THE�MOTION CARRIED UNRNIMOUSLY. � . . . .. . . . .. ... __ . .. ._ .. . . . ._ .. _ . ._ . ._ _ . . 2. OISCUSSION -0F HAZARDOUS 4fASTE PROCESSING FACICITT PtJBLIC WEARING ON TI Q Q Mr. Svanda stated the Corrmission members had all attended this meeting. Accord- ing to the memo Mr. F1ora had written, it appeared that about 700 peop7e had attended the afternoon and evening sessions. Mr. Peterson stated there were several very good speakers who gave exce7lent testimony against the faci7ity in Fridley. He stated some good input had been given from a person who lives in Fridley and works for the Dept, of Transportation. This person had stated that tfie streets in Fridley are not designed for any type of problems that might occur, sucfi as spillage. He f�ad pointed out that there are no cur6s and gutters on tF�e major 6ighways in Fridley, so �f there is a spill, it could run off and seep inio the ground, Mr. Wellan stated this person had also pointed out that fridley has the highest accident rate per mi7e than any other part of the metropo7itan area. Mr. Svanda stated he thought Mayor Nee and John Flora, Director of Public Works, had given excellent presentations. Mr. Peterson asked if the City has submitted any additional data �ecause of the extension for additional supporting data. Mr. Deblon stated he did not know, Mr. Flora is a member of a task force and has been followin� up on the hazardous waste issue. Mr. Peterson stated he would like Staff to talk to Mr, flora and find out a little more about this task force, Mr. Flora's involvement in it, who the members are, the charge of the task force, and what it hopes to accomplish. Ne felt the Commission should have a little more input on it. He also asked Staff to keep the Coimnission informed of any other information the City receives. 3. DEVELOPMENT OF AN AGENDA FOR REfUSE HAULERS' MEETIP�G: Mr. Svanda stated Ms. Metcalf had given the Comnission a]ist of suggested topics to be discussed with the haulers. He would like to use it as a guide as tfiey put together an agenda. He stated tfie Carenission shouid aiso compose a letter to be sent to the haulers inviting them to a meeting with the Canmission. Ms. Metcalf stated the first item on her list was: Haulers' costs are rising. She was referring to increasing the haulers' efficiency. Everyone is aware of the inefficiency of having eight residential haulers in Fridley. Also, costs are rising for the haulers--tipping fees, gasoline costs, manpower, and insurance. Because of these rising costs, tf�is migfi t incline tfie haulers to consider any way they can to improve their efficiency. ENUIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMISSION MEETING, MAY U, 1983 PAGE 3 Mr. Peterson referred to item #6: Has there been any thought among the haulers of dividing the city into zones with each hauler having a zone and avoiding the duplication of routes with extra gasoline costs as it is now? Ms. Metcalf stated that would be a way of increasing the haulers' efficiency. Mr. Deb7on stated tfiai Mr. Hutcfiison, Director of Environmental Services, Anoka County, had said at the Marcfi meeting that one truck can service approx. 1,500 dwelling units. He stated there are about 10,664 households in Fridley (that includes apartments). Mr. Svanda stated they cou7d find out how many households each hauler has in the City. Then, one way to handle it vrould be to set the city up into zones and guarantee each hauler a zone. Ms. Metcalf stated they should just wait and ask the haulers if they would consider any kind of zoning for their own advantages. Mr. Wellan stated that by designating certain areas f�r certain haulers, there might be people who will not want tfiat specific hauler. Ne stated the Commission's major concern is trying to reduce tfie waste stream. Mr. Svanda agreed. The Commission is just looking at getting some input fran the haulers on this whole process. Ms. Metcalf stated she felt the Comnission could be effective in trying to encourage the haulers to charge a per can rate. By doing this, they would a7so be encouraging residents to have fewer cans. Mr. Deblon stated he would like to see some specialized rate or pick-up for leaves and have it composted. Ms. Metca)f stated she would also like to hear what ideas the haulers have on recycling. Mr. Wellan stated if the Comnission had more time, he would like to see them make a study of the various types of recycling throughout the United States. He felt they had to have some concrete information on what has been tried and proven. What is being planned on the federal, state and county levels for recycling for the next five years? If tfie haulers ask questions, they should have some facts. Mr. Deblon stated that from attending so]id waste seminars, he has heard testi- mony from all over saying that the most innovative way of recycling is mandating source separation. It is working. Mr. Peterson stated he thought the haulers proba6ly are more aware of t6ese facts than the Commission members. Their business relies on tfiese types of decisions. He stated the Commission is really on a good will mission to he]p the haulers as well as the City. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMISSION MEETIN6� MAY 17, 1983 PAGE 4 Mr. Svanda asked Ms. Metcalf that 9n her discussions with various haulers, did she feel the haulers would be receptive to an invitation to meet with the Canmission? Ms. Metcalf stated she thought they would 6e very receptive. Mr. Deblon stated that at this meeting, tfie Commission should give a brief over- view o€ its mandate and how the Cottmission got to the point they are now and then discuss several issues. The Commission members compiled the following agenda for a future meeting with the haulers in Fridley: 1. Discussion of haulers' costs a. Tipping fees, gasoline costs, b. Cost per can possi6ility c. Co7lection efficiency, i.e „ insurance, equipment hauling districts 2. Possibility of City-Assisted Yard Waste Composting a. Potentia7 savings for hau]ers and haneowners b. Means of implementation 3. Effects of Recycling a. Hauler's role in encouraging residentia] recycling b. Feasibility of haulers collecting recyclables c. Cost per can possibi7ity d, Co7lection efficiency/hauling districts Mr. Wellan stated he still felt the Cortmission members should come up with some constructive ideas for recycling. If the Comnission wants to be a leader in this thing, they have to make more of an effort to show what can be done. The Comnission members agreed to set up a meeting with the haulers on Tuesday, June 7, 1983, at 7:30 p.m. Mr. Svanda agreed to draft a letter to be sent to the haulers. 4. CDBG FUNDS Item continued until another meeting. 5. OTHER BUSINESS: a. City's Oil Recycling Faci7ity Mr. Peterson stated he would like to have a report frap the City concerning the oil recycling facility. Since the Caunission was never advised as to the cost of instal7ing the oil recycling facility, ENVIRONMENTAL QUAUTY COMMISSIQN MEETING LMAY 17, 1983 PAGE 5 they would like to be advised of the cost of purchasing and installing the tank, a current report of the revenues generated frnn the oi7, and an idea of how much oil is collected monthly. MOTZON BY MR. WELLAN� SECONDSD BY AIR. NIELSON� TO RSQUEST STAFF TO GET THIS SNFQRMATSON QN TNE OIL RECYCLING FACILITY, UPON A VOICS VOTE, ALL Vdf2NC AYE� CHAIRPERSON SVANDA DECLARED TXE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. b. Super Insulation Seninar Mr. Svanda stated t6at at an earlier meeting, Mr. Deblon had stated he had attended a Super Insulation seminar and had videotaped it. Mr, Deblon stated it is an excellent videotape. He stated the tape has not yet been edited. Mr. Svanda asked Staff to keep tfie Commission posted and when the video- tape is avai]able for viewing, fie would like the Cormolsslnn members to see it. c. National Recycling Congress Seminar - Request 6y Connie Metcalf Ms. Metcalf stated she will be attending the 5econd Annual National Recycling Cangress, presented by National Recycling Coalition, Inc „ at the University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado, on Aug, 16-19. The cost is $75. She stated she would like to request some assistance from the Comnission to attend this. No action was taken by t6e Comnission, ADJOURNMENT: MOTION BY MR, PETERSON, 5ECONDED BY 1yR, WELLAN, TO AA7CXIRN THE MEETING. UPON A VOICE YOTE� RLL VOTINC, AYE, CHAIRPERSON SYANDA DECLARED THE 1�fAY 17� 1983� SNVIRONMBNTAL �TALITY COMMISSION MEETING ADJWXNED AT IOt30 P.A. Respectfully sutwnitted, �n2 Cr.�-c�- n e Saba Recording Secretary Y City of Fridley APPEALS COMMTSSION MEETING - TUESDAY MAT 24 1983 PAGE 1 _ CALL TO ORDER: Chai�Qerson 6abe1 called the llppeals Caamisston �eettng of Tuesday. May 24, 1983 to order at 7:30 p.m. ROLL�CALL: Nembers Present: Patricia 6abe1. Alex Barna, Jim Plemel, Jean 6erou, Donald Betzold Others Present: Oarrell Clark. City of Fridley Phit Larson. Stiliwater� MN Bob Sherlock, Stillwater. MN Carolyn Doy1e, fridley Kenneth Kasden. P.O. Box 16203, 55416 Mark Sampson, 271 Sylvan Lane 61enn Yan Hulzen, 9Ul Overton Orive N.E. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF MAY 10. 1983: MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Mrs. Gerou, to approve the minutes as written. 11PON A VOItf YOTE, ALL YOTIN6 AYE, CNAIRPERSON GABEL DECLARED THE AlOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 1. YARI 4 �_ �nequest oy wouroan L�gnting Inc., 6077 Lake Elmo r, M1 55082 [Robert Sherlock], for Union Oil Company). MOTION by M�s. Gerou, seconded by Mr. 8arna, to open the public hearing. UPON A YOICE YOTE. ALL YOTING AYE� CHAIRPER50N 6ABEL DECLAREO THE PUBLIC HEARIHG aPEN AT 7:34 P.M. Chairperson Gabel read the Staff Report: �D!lDISTRItIYB 3l�YP 1EPORT 5695 Haclaann henus 1.8. �. POBLIC PORPOSE 38HYSD 8T l6QOZR�ffiPT: E�otion 205•0�5. E2� 1ialta a free �taading ri�n to a�azimus size of �SgEt� (80) sQuare teet per development. tuDlic purpose served Dy thia require�ent is to oontrol �Ssual pollution and axeeasive uae of �i�s in oosmercial areaa. D. SitTBD HiRDSHIP: �S�Satiag signs vere erected uader old ordiaaece and rlth t6e gs� pricing eompatition today, re ■uat have a vay of advertising our producta effecti�sl�.' �ea1s Commission Meetina - Mav 24 1983 Paae 2 3. 4D!lI�ISTH�2178 ST�Ff 18TIEY: There are tvo e=iating frae ataading p�loa si�� on CEis property. One aign vaa erectsd �1/10/1970 �nd is � 12 foot diameter eircle tEat Sa 113 sRuare f�et in area. ihe second sign vas erected 6/16/1977 •nd Ss a SO apuare foot saa price si� (S' = 10'). TAe properiy ovnera Aave sincs atarted asing thi� sign ta a c�angeable �es�age ceater to advertise product �pecials. Thia Las roaulted in a need to provide •dditional signage, to asain advertlse the p�ice of aaa, so the property oxnera are requesting a ♦arl�nee to •dd txo idditYonal 3' = 3' 6�a prlce signs to tLe e:isting �essage center. TEe new total si� aroa vill De iacreaaed from 163 aQuare teet to. 781 aQuare tsei. TLe staff b�a no stipulatioas to add to thie �ariance if the Board approve� tEia reQuent. Mr. Larson and Mr. Sherlock were present. Mr. Clark presented an aerial photo and photographs of the area. Mr. tarsort said the sign was ortginally set up with most of it as a message center and to accomodate the price 99.9 and with 51.00+ gas prices they want to continue the message center with 3'x3' sign. He felt it woudl clean up the looks of the Lop of the sign He said the biggest problem is the freeway stgn. He further stated there was no impact on the city, it is set up to face the freeway and to get people from the freeway. Ms. Gabel said she drove to the area and thought the message center tould read more. Mr. Larson said it would infringe on their cigarette specials; that the cigarette speciats are on the 6oarE most of the time. Ms. Ga6ei said the sign is at a peculiar angle and of no benefit going north on Highway 65, that all you can see is the side of the reader board. Mr, Sherlock said St is set up to catch the view at the intersection. Mr. Larson said if the big sign was not there, there would not be a�y probiem, Mr. P1eme1 said they are trying to sell gas and he did not see how it helped to sell tigarettes and tiqhters; that they could advertise gas effecifvely with the letter size they have naw. Mr. Larson said most setf-service stations use their sale prices of cigarettes as a merchandising practice. Ms. Gabe1 said the hardship directs ttself to gas pricing competition and she could see Mr. Plemel's point. She also felt there is space for the gas prices. She asked what the sign would be made of and Mr, Larson said it was aluminum cabinet with lexon face and internaily lit. Mr. Barna said th�y could make their numbers smaller and still use present reader board for their advertising. Mr. Betzold said he was confused and asked what for vfiat purpose they needed the reader board. Mr. Larson said for cigarettes and lighters. Mr. Betzold asked if they would keep the numbers the same size or make them smaller and Mr. Larson said they woutd be smaller and Mr. Betzold �rondered why the numbers would be s�aa]ler. Ms. Ga�el felt their hardship was self-impesed -- they want to use the sign for something other than gas prices. Mr. larson felt it rss discrimination tf they +ve�en't ntlowed to advertise. Ms. Gabe1 said they were already granted one variance and it is their choice that they use the sign differently and there has W be a definite hardship. Mr. Barna said the only hardship he could see was self-imposed. Mr. Larson said it fs Union pil's marketing policy, Mr. Barna suggested putting the cigarette and llighter ads in the window. MOTION by Nr. Betzold, seconded by lfrs. 6erou, to close the pu6lic hearing. UPON A VOIGE VOTE, ALL YOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON 6ABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOS£D A7 7:49 P.M. Appeals Commission Meeting - Nay 24, 1983 Page 3 Mrs. Gerou said she did not see the hardship and the advertising was for something other than gas prices. Mr. Plemel said he looked at the area and there seems to be enough signage. Mr. Betzold toncurred with the hardship and clgarette discussion and felt there was no reason for a bigger sign; that this is what the sign ordinance ts all about and they have to Eraw a 11ne. MOTION by Mr. Betzold. seconded by Mr. Barna, that the Appeals Commission recommend to the City Council derttal of the variance request to increase the maximum square footage of a free standing sign from 80 sq. ft. to 181 sq. ft. (existing sign 163 sq. ft.), located on part of Lot 1, Auditor's Subdivision No. 25, the same being 5695 Hackmann Avenue N.E., Frtdley, Mirtnesota, 55432. UPON A YOtCE YOTE. ALL YOTING AYE, CHAIRMAN GABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNAHIMOUSLY. (Agenda Item /2 was tabled until later 1n the a�eeting as the Petitioner was detained and not present yet). Z VARIANCE REQUEST DURSUANT TO_LHAPTER 214_OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE, TO E PLAT I, THE SAME BEING 65T5 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E. (Kequest Dy Ke , Tile Fattory Outlet, Inc. P. 0. Box 16203. Minneapolis, Ml 55416) MOTION by Mr. Betzold, seconded by Mr. Plemel, to open the public hearing. UPDN A YbT�YOTE, ALL YOTING AYE, LHAIRPERSOH GABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HfARING OPEN AT 1:55 P.M. Chairperson 6abe1 read the Staff Report: �DMIILSTLlI�B ST�!'F =6P0ltT 6525 Oni��rsit� l��nw f.E. �. l4D1.IC ?'ORPOSB SERTSD sT �EQDI�IR: S�otlon 214.046, S2, lifits a tr�e •tandia� �isn to a•a:i�ui aise of �1sEt� (a0) puar� t�et p�r de�alop�ent. tuDlic purpose �er�ed br L�ia roQuir�ient i• to ooctrol •isual pollution aad �:cesaive use of �isns ia oo�aercial anas. s. ET�T6a 811tDS8IT: �7i1• T�etor� Outl�t Ine.. is � Mlnoeaota Corporatioo that riahes to •zpand it'a oper�tioa loto Pridley. Bore��r, tbis location rould oniy t+e �ceeptaDle to �ue yroviding Lhis aseded tig� �ariance Ss sr�nted. Y� f�el due to tLe poor �isibilit� of tDe ltoro Stself and tLe �ery lieited si�� frontage ve rould be puttiag outsel�es �t �♦err `reat disadvantage. �s 1t standa nw, 10.000 4uto Tarts Stars usts approzi.ac•ir 9of of tAe ourreot sign, l�a�la6 as arounQ �SSEt square l�et. Msedlesa to say, a Eusper sticker reould Oe �re tiaiDl�. TEa sranting of tLia n�eded ♦ariance rould pe to our ■utual adr�etase. Deaides t�e fact LLat ve vill bire four �ore Mianeeot�na, iridley itielt vill �reatl� beaefit, due W our yrogreaai�e sdvertising. Each of our four locations vill Ee allocatad a•iais� of �25,000 per �ear for advertiaing. MucA of thi� �oaey vill De spent vith �our local navspaper, shopper�, etc. Our advertising vill pring aany aert people into LEe Fridley area, ■any of rEicn rill �pend dollara on otder aoods and servicea. � Appeals Commission Meeting - May 24, 1963 Pace 4 !he»for�, ra l�sl tE� �rantioa of LDis •�ritace vould be to •ver�one�s aQrantase. C. �DMI�IS?t�S17E ST�TF �ETlsfi: TOe •:isting t��e standing p�lon s1� vaa �r�et�d oa 3/22/19T9• TLe ai6n 1� S' s 15' vith a�urf�ce area of 75 �quare feet. 7Le prospecti�e tsnant frla�ss to �rect a 5' s 15� �ddition to tbe e:istios Dylon sian tAereDy locr+asiag the Lotal �ian area Lo 150 aQuars f�et or 70 •quare f�et ove� the allo�ed 80 �puaro f�et. Th� Cit� Eaa Eeen in ooatact vith 10,000 luto Pa�ts aEout �aiatenance fo� t��ir rall a16a�. If thia �triaace is sr�nted, Eoth 10,000 �uto Parta and LE• nav L�n�at shoulQ Es •ade avara of tEe need for routine sisn �intenaace. llao, it is suggeatsd that tEe nex sisn De of •iellar deaign •aQ •tructure as tGs �ziaiia� siga acQ tAat tDe E�se ot LDe •San De lapro�ed tLrougri reTiaiahiag a� Lhe installatioa of • plaat�r. Mr. Clark presented photos of t6e area. Mr. Kasden was present. Ms. Gabel in- quired as to the agreement w{th 10,000 Auto store. Mr. Kasden stated he has just a one-month lease ho)ding the space pending the appeals decision. He said the building is in deplorable condition; it needs new glass and the signage has to be fixed. He said the signage is needed for the Tile Factory store as the buildinq is set far back. Mr. Clark satd 10,000 Auto has been ordered to clean up their wall signs. Mr. Kasden explained they are moving into the space where Carpet Remnant used to 6e and they will sub=let from 10,000 who teases from Red Owl. Mr. Llark said staff has been working with 10,000 auto by phone and letters and if they don't clean up they will be tagged. Mr, Kasden said their sign wiil De similar to 1Q,000 Auto's; a professional sign yellow with black lettering and read from both directions. FLs. Gabel asked about signage on the front of the store. Mr. Kasden said they will put up what is legally allowed and will clean up their area. He said it vrould take about 55,000 to clean up the front of the building and they want to put up external tighting. Ne said Lheir closest other store 1s 7371 Brooklyn Boulevard and they sell strictly tile. He said they wouid probably sign a one-year lease with 10,000 and have three 5-year renewals. He said the new sign will cost about E900-1,000. He also said they do a loY of advertising and need that kind ai markinq for people to find the store. He atso suggested putting some sAruDbery around Lhe existing sign. Ms. 6abe1 felt there was a legitimate hardship. Mr. Kasden said Fridley is a good location for them, there is a lot of building and they have people comi�g from all over to their store (Wisconsin, Duluth, southern Minnesota) and the space {about 4,000 sq. ft.) is what they need. He asked if 10,000 could be senY a letter regarding the appeals proceedings. Fir. ttark said it coutd be part of the motion. Mr. Clark said i0,004 leases from Red Owl who leases from Mrs. Theisen and the responsiDility of cleaninq up the wa11 signage, etc., is most likely 10.000 Auto's. Mr. Kasden said his lease would be a triple-net lease and he would be responsiDle for their own signage. MOTTON by Mr. Plemel, seconded by Mr. Barna, to ciose the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL YOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON GABEL DELLAREO THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:15 P.M, Appeals Commission Meetina - May 24 1983 Page 5 Mrs. Gerou said there was a definite hardship. Mr. Barna satd the situation is somewhat similar to the Northwest Fa6rics situation. Mr. Betzold agreed. Ms. 6abe1 agreed, and said there was no way you could read the sign at its present size. MOTION by Nr. Betzold, seconded by Mr. Barna. that the Appeats Commission recomnend to the City Council, approval of the variance request to increase the maximum square footage of a free standing stgn from 80 sq. ft. to 150 sq. ft., located on Lots 10, 11 and t2, Block 2, Rice Creek Terrace Plat I, tfie same being 6525 University Avenue N.E., Fridley, Minnesota, 55432, with tAe stipulation that new signage not be put up until the present wall signage is cleaned up and brought up to the maintenance portion of the code, that the city staff shall direct a letter to 10,000 Auto store prior to the City Council meeting informing them of the Appeals Commission decision and recommendation, and that the �ew sign be of similar design and structure as the existi�g sign and that the base of the siqn De improved through refinishing and the inst�llation of a pla�ter. UPON A VOICE YOTE, ALL YOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON 6ABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 9. MOTION by Mrs. 6erou, seconded by Mr. Barna, to open tfie public hearing. UPON A OICE YOTE, ALL YOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON GABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 8:20 P.M. Chairperson Gabel read the Staff Report: ♦DM2113?R►iIYB SiIPF 1tEPORS 6150 L�rr� Laa� ■•B• �, lOBLIC PORPO38 SBR9� sS 11SQDIREl�IPT: Sl�etion 205•�52. ;1. raQuirea a�ini�um front �ard setDacic of not less than thirty-five (95) leet. Pu011c purpoae served Dy tEia parlcing vithout sncroac�3ng on teat6etic consideration to reduce into tbe neighbor's front ��rd. 3�etion 205•15�. 2, 1Loita ths Dro}eetion of Euttreases and eaves to not �ora Lhan Lhree (3} fset ioto anp reCulrod Tard. Tublic yurpese xrved by this reQuireaent ie for aeathetic coaaideration to reduce the Duilding •line of aight• �ncroachaent iato t6e neig6bor'a front �ard. requireaeat Se to LEe yuDlic right t�e bulldiag 'liae allo� for off-atreet of waq and alao for oi aight" encroscAment B. S?►TED HiHDS6IY: `Drop-off at point rslati�el� near froat of lot cloaer to boulevard to place footioga at Daek alaa for vali�-out ba�ement to De plaoed ia topography. requirea tLat bou�e Ee aet of Douae on solid aoil and con�unction vith ezinting �peals Commission Meeting - May 24, 1983 Paqe 6 C. 1DMINISTRASIYE ST�TF �IEY: Tdia ♦ariance v�� conaidered and approreQ oc OcLODer y, 1979. rith t�e �zception of the Duitrea� rall. !Ge tiee limit on tEe approval das ezpired and Lbe lot has aiace beep purchaaed Dy Mr. Mark Sampsoa. Sbere'have been 00 oelghDoring lots built on aiace t�e laat appro�al. If t6e Boerd avvr�ovea thia rsaue�t, staff bas no �tipulatioa� to recommend. Mr. Sampson was present. Mr. Clark presented the fioor plan of the proposed new dwelling and Mr. Sampson present an artist's eievation and explained hts plans. Mr. Sampson said he Aas spoken with his neighbors and they have no ob3ections. He also said the setbacks woutd make the dwelling line up better with the existing homes in the area. Ms. 6aDe1 said she has taTked with Mrs. Palmer, who tives in the area, and she is in favar of the rtew clwellfny. Mr. Sampson said they w111 be Duilding a walk-vut and there wi}1 6e a large foundation; he said they will be qetting extra fill for the back. Mr. Betzold asked when he would be starting. Mr. Sampson said he hopes to afford to start after the 4th of July, if not, possibly next Spring. MOTION by Mrs. Gerou, seconded by Mr. Barna, to close the pu611c hearing. UPON A Y6I�E VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, LHAIRPERSON GABEL DECLAREO THE PUBLtC HEARIN6 CLOSED AT 8:30 P.M. Mr. P1eme1 said he could readily see the hardship in this situation and the rest of the members concurred. MOTION by Mr. Ptemet, seconded by Mr. Barna, that the Appeals Lommission approves the variance request to reduce the front yard setback from the required 35 feet to 25 feet, and a11ow a retaining wali to be located 15 feet from the front property line instead of the required 32 feet, to a11ow the construction of a new dwelling vrith an attached garage on Lot 5, 81ock 2, Heather Hi11s 7hird Addition, the same being 615Q Kerry Lane N.E., Fridley, MN 55432. UPON A YOICE VOTE, ALL YOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON GABE� 11ECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLV. 't . MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Mrs. 6erou, to open the pubtic hearing. UPON A Y�I'�YOTE, ALL YOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON GABEL DELLARED 7HE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 8:31 P.M. _ Chairperson Gabel read the Staff Repori; �DNI1I31'R�TIYH Si►YF IBPORT 907 0►srion Dri�� l.E. �. TOBLIIC PORPOSE S6R�SD HS 6BQUIR�BFT': 3�etion 205•052. �B, /1. requirea a 10 loot aini�um side �ard satDack for liting araa. - --- ----^---+v-^.*rn��s�� Appeals tommission Meetina - May 24 1983 Paae 7 lublic purposa s�r��d p� tEis r�Quir��ent is to �aintain a■Saieum of trent� (20) f�et Detreea li�ioa ar�aa in ad��cent •t�ucturea •ad fifteen (�5) feet Detveen saragea and li�ing �roaa in �d�acent structure� to rsduce �spoaure to oonflagr�tion of fin . It is also to •llov !or teethetically pleaaio� open areaa amund reaideatial atructurta. D. E'f�SSD H�RDSSIP: •Connie Yan Hulzen visDea to oDen a E�aut� s�op Sn Ler home. The only practical place for tAe salon vould pe tEs 9 foot z 22 toot storage area located •d�acent to Doylaa propert� (921 Overton). TEia attacAed atorage arsa ia vitdin five (5) t�et of the proyarty liae. Thia ares if approved Mould not De uaed for �ny naidsntial Dur'Pcaea at, any tLe. C. IDMIlI3TYlTIi ST�FF 1B�IEY: ?Ee roal question �ere Sa vEether Lo allow • li�ing syace to be five (5) feet from a side lot liae. !he neighboring structure ia an attached prage . It Lhe •ariaacc ia arant�d it �hould pe atipulated th�t tEe besuty ahop �eets Lhe home occupation definitiou and tDat tDers De no oDeninga in the outaide vall neareat Lhe lot 11oe. Mr. Clark presented aeriai photos of the area that showed the proximity of the trro structures. He said he talked with the nearest neighbor, Mrs. Doy1e, and �' � there are some differences. Mrs. Doyle and Nr. Yan Hulzen were present. Mr. C1ark said they would want to be sure to restrict the openings on the watt facing the O�yles. Mr. Yan Hulzen said there is presently a rindow on that side and it woutd be closed up and there would be no differences in the front of the house except to remove the existing garage door and put in a large bay window and there would be a fire exit door in the back. He felt it would be aesthetically pleasing and would decorate so it appeared all the same and there ►+ould be a walkway around the house. He said their garage is on the Able Street side. Ms. 6abe1 asked how many chairs in the beauty shop. Mr. Yan Hulzen said there would be two, one wet and one dry and his wife w�uld be the onty one working as the city code prohibits employees. Mr. Betzotd asked where the customers would park. Mr. Yan Hulzen said they could park in that driveway in front or in their garage driveway or in the street. Mr. Betzold asked about the hours of 6usiness. Mr. Yan Hulzen said they would be daytime, weekly hours as they are very busy at nights and on the weekends with their familiy. Mr. Betzold asked if there would be any business signs on the property. Mr. Yan Hulzen said no, that this is something that interests his wife and would be security for her in case something happened to him. Mr. Betzold asked rhere he woutd be storing his boat. Nr. Yan Hulzen said he has leesed space in a storage place on Central Avenue. Ms. 6abe1 ask�d about the necessary 1lcensing. Nr. Yan Hulzen said his wife has the necessary licenses and wttl get oLhers if she needs them. ADPea1s Commission Meeting - Nay 24, 1963 ' Page B Mrs. Doyte presented copies of a letter she had written regarding this matter. Ms. Gabel read the letter for the record. (See attached letter). MOTION by Mr. Barna, seconded by Mr. Betzold, to receive Mrs. Doyle's letter into the minutes. UPON A VOICE YOTE, ALL YOTING AYE. CHAIRPERSON GABEL DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANINOUSLY. . Nrs. Doyle was strongty opposed the beauty parlor idea and the traffic on the ralk►vay. She said they use their side door alt the time and their dog would bark everytime some came and left the 6eauty parlor. She said they moved into the area because it was a quiet residentTal area and t6is business vrould be too close to their 1ot line. She felt that the beauty parlor could 6e put on the Able Street side as it faces no other homes or driveways. She also felt this could be detri- mental if her and her husba�d wanted to sell their home. MOTION by Mr. Betzold, seconded by Mr. Barna, to close the public hearing. UPON A 40IGE YOTE, ALL VOTING AYE. CNAIRPERSON GABEL DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING CL�SED AT 6:47 P.M. Mr. Betzold felt the variance was hard to 3ustify and due respect should be given to the Doyles and that tfiis variance would clearty be at the Doyles' expense. Ms. Gabel said they have to keep in mind that the Van Hulzen's could do this some where else in their home. Mr. Piemel agreed with Mr. Betzold and Mrs. 6erou was not in favor of the variance. Mr. Barna said this was a hard situation for the neighbors. MOTION by Mr. Betzold, seconded by Mrs. 6erou, that the Appeals Lommission recommend to the City Council, denial of the variance request to reduce the side yard setback on the living side of a house from the required 10 feet to 5 feet, to a11ow part of a converted garage to be used for a beauty shop, located on Lot 18, Block 4, Brookview Terrace, the same being 901 Overton Drive N.E., Fridley, Minnesota, 55432. UPON A YOICE YOTE. ALL YOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON GABEL DECLARED THE MOT10N CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION by Mr. Betzold, seconded by Mr. Barna, to adjourn. UPON A YOICE YOTE, ALL YOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON fABEL DECLARED THE APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING OF MAY 24, 1983, ADJOURNED AT 8:52 P.M. Respectfully submitted. Deb Niznik, Recording Secretary ( S To [iEwm It May Concern: May 25, 1983 My neighbora, 1tr• and l:rs• Glenn VanHulzen, at 901 Overton Drive are re- questing a variance to rome closer to our lot line with vhat is knova as llv- iag quar�ere. Iascead rf 30 feet from the lct line, the�'d oe about S fee[. the reason they van[ this ia to build a beauty shop. � !fy first thought vhen Ttr. YanHulzen stated he vas building "something for Connie" vas that I didn't knov vhat he was talking about. As I thought later about vhat he vas building, I realized it could be a beauty ehop. I � though[ "Oh no!" We use our side door most (actually all) of the time. Their variance vould make it too close vith people coming and going, our dog barking everytime someone came or left. Just the chought of a beauty shop so close up- set me. We bought in a quiet residential area nineteen years ago and vould not vant chis type of business (like a restaurant business} to close to our home. Brent, my husband, tried to reassure me since he said the VanHulzens couldn't .: do this because ii vould be too close [o the lot line. Mr. VanHulzen came ovez to our home to dlscuss this matter vlth us and ex- plained he vas going to apply for a variance, and stated Connie, his vife,only did hair for a hobby and because she vas bored, but also, in the next breath, Snsteadsof a fev cust merssiitscouldCdevelopeinto�some[hing morei[hao aehobbye• created out of eoredam, into a ateady business. Thr VanHulzens are the third family to live at 901 O�+erton Drive since vr have lived next door. Another thouRht on this matter is, if they should m�v��. v�ulCn't tfie varlance scay in effect for the nev ovnerc? I also vrn,id like tu ouraownrhomejandiproperty.ofI knovyifhve hadsrealizedaa beau[yfshopt(�rVanYe uf oti�er type of business) next .�uur vas there, ve vu��ld not have bouRht our l�ome. !!r, Vanflulzen stated to me thaC people should be able to do vhat thev vant on their ovn property. I stated to him if this variance reyuest vas bein¢ aade by the Doyles, hov vould he feel, and he gave no reply. He commented that tre've gotten along alvays before as neigfibors. T fel[ he impLed tha[ if ve Iiknov �hynmyhhusbandahas�alwaYsusai3QthaY he dcresn�'ty'.ike�thenhasseleof a��W variance. Ne have wanted to do a fev things dlffereat on aur pro�erty and couldn't because of city codes. I feel ve have to resqecc these codes. It �s quite c':fficult because as neiRhbozs ve may live next door to tach o[her a lo[ becausesofnthis variance requesLasaThisoreallyaputseaeneiqhbornonhthe ��o��n�'s � I thought more and nore about my true feelings and I really do not vant a beauty shop that close to my prorerty line. iJhether our neiRhbors vere the VenHulzens, or the Jones, or black or vhite, I'd feel the same vay. It vould be much bettez if [he shop vas built on the Able Street side of their property as no home faces that vay and no drivevays are that close. Please, in eonsidering this variance, have regards to my tboughts and fee]Sngs in this matter. Thank you. Respectfully submicted, l.�"� � 0 - Carolyn Doyle, Nomeovner 921 Overton Drive N.E. Frid2ey, ?�N 55432 � CITY Of FRIDLEY ENERGY COMMISSION MEETING MAY 25, 1983 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Saba called the May 25, 1983, Energy Comnission meeting to order at 7:44 p.m. He stated tfiat since there was not a quorum, this meeting would be for discussion purposes only. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Dean Saba, Bruce Bondow Mgnbers Absent: Bill Jordan, Todd Tessmer Others Present: Bill Deblon, Associate Planner APPROVAL OF MARCH 22, 1983, ENERGY COMMISSION MINUTES: Mr. Saba stated approval of the minutes would be continued until another meeting when there is a quorum, l. CONTINUED: EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS a, Minnesota Energy Conservation Service (MECS) Promotion Grant Mr. Saba stated they had to get something started for the MECS promotion since the money has to be spent or cortmitted to be spent by June 30. Mr. Deblon stated he would be writing an article to be put in the sumner city newsletter, He asked the Commission members to select the camera-ready artwork they would like included with the article in the newsletter. , Mr. Deblan stated he would contact the Fridley Sun to see if they would be willing to donate some space for the promotion of the MECS home energy audit. Mr. Bondow suggested they print a flyer that could be distributed by volunteers--Boy Scouts, 4-H club, etc. They should also put an article again in the fall city newsletter. The Comnission members agreed to contact the Lions Club, Jaycees, Menards, Lamperts, the Energy Shed, and the Fridley Sun to see if these groups or companies would be willing to make a donation to help support the cost of the promotion, Any organizations or companies that contribute will be listed on the materials as endorsing the MECS home energy audit, Y ENERGY COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 25, 1983 PAGE 2 b. Programs for Cable TV Mr. Saba stated they should start running the video tape, "Saving Energy at Home" by Aetna Insurance Co., 1980, on cable TV. Mr. Saba stated the video tape area opens up a whole new area of education far the Energy Canmission, and he would iike to see them obtain videos whenever possible in order to build up an energy library, 2. CONTINUED: ENERGY ACCOUNTING Mr. Saba requested Staff to get an update on the Energy Accounting system. 3. OTHER BUSINESS: a. Receive Letter of Resignation from Todd Tessmer Mr. Saba accepted the letter of resignation from Todd Tessmer and requested Staff to pass the letter on to the City Council. He expressed tF�e need for new Convnission members as this leaves the Co�mnission with only three rt�embers. b. CO Monitor Mr. Bondow stated he would vo)unteer to write to some companies that manufacture CO monitors to see if any of these companies would be willing to market a iess expensive model that could be used by the Energy Co�mnission for a possible CO awareness program. ADJOURNMEN7: Chairperson Saba declared the May 25, 1983, Energy Comnission meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lynne Saba ' Recording Secretary � ' � � + CITY OF FRIDLEY { ;PLANNTNG COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 8, 1983 CALL TO ORDER: Vice-Chairperson Oquist called the June 8, 1983, Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:32 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Mr. Oquist, Mr. Saba, Ms. Gabel, Mr. Kondrick, Mr. Svanda, Mr. Goodspeed Members Absent: Ms. Schnabel Others Present: Jerrold Boardman, City Planner Richard & Sonia Peterson, 247 - 57th P7ace Lawrence & Joyce Zimmerman, 5380 4th St. N.E. Laura Vagovich, 5400 4th St, N.E. APPROVAL OF MAY 18 1983 PLANNING COMMISSiON FIINUTES: MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK� SECONDED BY MR. SABA� TO APPROVE THE JUNE 8� I983� PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RS WRITTEN. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� VICE-CHAIRPERSON OQUIST DECLARED THE MOTION CliRRIED UNRNIMOUSLY. 1. VACATION REQUEST: SAV #83-01, PETITION N0. 4-83: Uacate the Easterly T3'�, 0 eet o 54t Avenue etween Blocks 12 a� 13, Hamilton's Addition to Mechanicsville, by the owners of 5380 and 5400 4th '�treet N.E. Mr. Boardman stated this was the area where Dr. J. C. Schurstein had proposed to put an office building back in �ec, 198�. There is a service road that comes in and cul-de-sacs right along University Ave, There is an unpaved alley at this location that is used to service the backs of the properties along 4th St. It also services apartments and sane businesses. Mr. Boardman stated the vacation request is for a portion of 54th Ave. between Blocks 12 and 13. The vacation request is being made by the two property owners on either side. Mr. Boardman stated the alley is being used and at some point in time, the City is going to have to pave that alley as long as it is being used. If the alley is paved, they would have to make sure there was access on 6oth ends. At this point in time, the City has been opposed to a vacation of that portion of 54th Rve., primarily because there is no way out of the alley, and the ]ogical way for circulation within that area would be to come up to 54th Ave. An alter- native would be to come down and connect into the cul-de-sac, but that may not be an appropriate way to go. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 8 1983 PAGE 2 Mr. Boardman stated that when Dr, Schurstein proposed the development of an office building in this location, as a condition of the permit, the City Council required that Dr. Schurstein pay for the improvemerit of the alley. Because of that, Dr. Schurstein did not build, and the a71ey 9's still unimproved, Mr. 6oardman stated that in their consideration of this vacation request, the Planning Commission should consider what is going to be done with that alley and at what point they want access. The Engineering Dept, has said the best possible way for access is back up to 4th St. That would be in direct conflict with this vacation request. Ms. Laura Vagovich, 5400 4th St. N.E., stated she has lived in Fridley for 34 yrs. Her house was moved twice, once for Highway 100 and aqain for I-694. She has maintained this portion of the street for 34 years. She stated she would like to have the protection of not having people going through there. People drive through there and dump things in the bushes and tre�es, and she has even had things stolen out of her garden. She stated she ha�i assumed for years that this road was already vacated and had maintained it because she thought it was vacated. Mr. Lawrence Zimmerman, 5380 4th St. N.E., stated it was his intention to put up a retaining wall and use the 30 ft, gained from the vacation to build a road to a garage he would build on his property. Mr. Boardman stated that even if they vacated the st:reet right-of-way, they would want to retain the southern half of the street for storm sewer. Mr. Zimnerman stated the most logica] way and the cheapest way for the alley access was to go out on the cul-de-sac. Mr, Oquist asked if it would be feasible to put a turn-around area by using the portion of 54th Ave, that is not vacated plus the portion of the street they want vacated. Mr. Boardman stated that if they are going to retain 30 ft, for easement, why not retain another 30 ft, so if the alley is ever improved, they can get access. He stated if the property owners wanted to fence this> portion of the street, they could do so right now. The problem is that if at anv point in time a road wouid be required to go in there, that fence would be removed at no cost to the City, Mr. Zimmerman stated the main reason for the vacatiori request is so he can build a garage with access off 4th St. He did not intend to use the alley, because it is 2-3 feet below his property. He is going to have to put up a retaining wall at the back of his property. Mr. Boardman stated it was his understanding that if the property owner put a fence or a driveway over the easement, if the City has to dig up that easement, the City is not responsible for putting back b]acktop or fencing. It would be the property owner's responsibility to put back whatever was torn up. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 8 1983 PAGE 3 Mr. Boardman agreed with the fact that there is nevar going to be a street connection in there Zhat would utilize the whole 60 ft. He had no problem with vacating the street right-of-way, but they should retain the storm sewer and access easement. In that sense, the property is no longer owned by the City of Frid7ey but by the property owners; but the City would still retain an easement so if they need to go through with a road or access for the alley, they can use that easement. Mr, Oquist stated another alternative would be to ac:cess by the highway property if the Highway Dept, turns that property over to thE� City. Ms. Vagovich stated that, as Mr. Zimnerman had stated, the main purpose for the vacation is so Mr. Zimmerman can build a garage and access onto 4th St. They will jointly maintain the property, Mr. Bosrdman stated that if Mr. Zimmerman puts in his garage and accesses onto 4th St. over the 30 ft. easement, if the alley is improved and comes up to the street grade, it in effect replaces his driveway ancl he would sti71 have access onto the alley. MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK� SECONDED BY MR. SVANDA� TO F:ECOMMEND TO THE CSTY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF VACATION REQUEST� SAV #83-OI� PETITION N'O. 4-83� TO VACATE 54TH AVENUE ALL TXE WAX TO THE HIGHWAY PROPERTY AND THAT THE CITY OF PRIDLEY RESASN ACCESS EASEMENT OVER THE TOP OF THE EXSSTING 30 FT. UTILITY' EASEMENT, UPON R VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� VICE-CHAIRPERSON OQUIS2 DECLRRED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Boardman stated the public hearing at City Council on this vacation request would be on July 11, 7983. 2. LOT SPLIT REQUEST, L.S. �83-02, BY RICHARD & SONIA PETERSON: Split off Lot 12 and the Westerly 30 feet of Lot 13, Block 1, City View, to make a new building site, the same being 241 - 57th Place N.E. Mr. Boardman stated the petitioners own Lots 12, 13, 14, and 15. These are 40 ft. lots totalling 160 ft. of lot area. They are requesting to split off Lot 12 and the westerly 30 ft, of Lot ]3 so that Lots 12 and 13 wil] become a 70 ft, lot. The depth of the 7ot is 140 ft. It does meet the 9,000 sq. ft. lot requirement and meets all other requirements as far as 7ot splits. A lot split does require a park fee of �500. The park fee is payable at the time of approval of the lot split request; however, the City Council may defer collection to the time the building permit is requested for individual lots created by such a lot split. This would depend an whether the petitioner requested the City Council to delay payment of the park fee. The petitioners were in the audience. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. JUNE 8, 1983 PAGE 4 MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK� SECONDED BY MR. GOODSPEED� TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF LOT SPLIT REQUEST� L.S. N83-02� BY RICHARD AND SONIA PETERSON� TO SiIT OFF LOT I2� AND THE WESTERLY 30 FEET OF LOT 13� BLOCK Z� CITY VIEW� TO MAKE A NEW BUILDSNG SITE� THE SAME BEING 241�57TH PLACE N.E. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL YOTING AYE� VICE-CHAIRPER50N OQUIST DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANTMOUSLY, Mr, Boardman stated this request would go to City Council on June 20. 3. MOTIDN BY MR, SRBA� SECONDED BY AII2. KONDRICK� TO CONTZNUE DISCUSSION ON THE ANIMAL ORDINANCE UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING. The Commission members requested that Jim Phillips, Legal Intern, be at the next Planning Commission meeting when this is discussed to answer any questions the Commissioners might have. UPDN A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� VICE-CHAIRPERSON OQUIST DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNRNTMOUSLY. 4. RECEIVE MAY 10, 1983, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSI�N MINUTES: MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK� SECONDED BY MR, SVANDA� TO RECEIVE THE MAY I0� Z983� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MINUTES. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� VICE-CHAIRPERSON OQUIST DECITiRED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, 5. RECEIVE MAY 12, 1983, HOUSING & REDEUELOPMENT Al1TH�RITY MINUTES: MOTION BY MR. SABA� SECONDED BY MS. GABEL� TO RECEIVE THE MAY Z2� 1483� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MINUTES. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� VICE-CHAIRPERSON OQUIST DECLARED THE MOTION CARRISD UNANIMOUSLY. Ms. Gabe] stated that at the last meeting, the Commission had asked that Mr. Boardman explain the HRA's financial process and the General Reserve System. Mr. Boardman stated the General Reserve System is a complicated program to explain, but it is really quite a simple tool. He stated he would put together for the Planning Commission members a summary explaining the system. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 8, 1983 PAGE 5 6. RECEIVE MAY 16 1983 PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES: MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK, SECONDED BY MR. GOODSPEED� TO RECEIVE THE MAY Z6, I983, PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHRIRPERSON OQUIST DECLARED THE MOTION CRRRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 7. RECEIVE MAY 17 1983 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMISSION MINUTES: MOTION BY MR. SVANDA� SECONDED BY MR. SABA� TO RECEIVE THE MAY 17� 1983� ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMISSION MINUTES. Mr, Svanda stated the meeting w9th the refuse hau7ers has been scheduled for Wed., June ]5. He invited the Planning Commission members to attend this meeting. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON OQUIST DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, 8. RECEIVE MAY 24, 1983, APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES: MOTION BY MS. GABEL� SECONDED BY MR, KONDRICK� TO RECESVE THE MAY 24� 1983� APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES. UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� VICE-CHAIRPERSON OQUI5T DECLARED SHE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, 9. RECEIVE MAY 25, 7983, ENERGY COMMISSION MINUTES: MOTION BY MR. SABA, SECONDED BY MR. KONDRTCK� TO RECESVE SHE MAY 25, 1983, ENERGY COMMISSION MINUTES. � UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� VSCE-CHASRPERSON OQUIST DECLARED TXE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, ADJOURNMENT: h10T20N BY MR. SABA� SECONDED BY MS. GABEL� TO ADJOURN THE MEETING, UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE� VICE-CHAIRPER50N OQUIST DECLARED THE JUNE 8� 1983� PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:30 P.M, Respe tfully subm'tted, c2 Lynn Sa a Recording Secretary